Of course. I'm not talking about lack of money though here. We've all been on our last tenner until payday and need to go somewhere.
Some people seem to think that spending less at the pump means your saving money, but to save money you need to drive less. They religiously drive on £10-20 fuel stops.
My ex wife was convinced she spends less on fuel by putting less in a time, she even earnt more than me.
I put in £3 worth of fuel the other day but that's because it was a rental car that I had to return with the same fuel level as at pickup and I'd only done ~30 miles with lots of stop/start. (I would have used a Zipcar/Zipvan but they've all gone now.) I would have tried to put in less but UK fuel pumps usually mandate a minimum of 2 litres which is not far off £3 at current prices.
Out of curiosity how does that work (never been in a situation where I have to worry about minimal fuel purchases) - does the pump simply round up the price to the minimum when done, or did you actually have to dispense extra fuel, either into a jerrycan or donating it to someone else's car otherwise the pump would not actually finalize the transaction?
It's mandated by a sticker saying so. I don't think it's ever enforced.
A google seems to show that it is because the pumps are not certified to be accurate below 2 litres (or 5 litres for higher flow rate pumps like the HGV diesel pumps) so anything below this is at your own risk.
Another way of thinking about it is you have no right to complain if you think you've been short fueled if you don't dispense the minimum stated.
I'd like to think that we all agree that you would be arrested for saying things in person (hate crimes, etc) would be the same things you'd be arrested for saying online... i'd place the line about there.
> we all agree that you would be arrested for saying things in person (hate crimes, etc) would be the same things you'd be arrested for saying online..
And that’s where you’d be wrong - lots of us belief that speech should not be a cause for arrest except in the most extreme circumstances. Hurting someone’s feelings is not that
> And that’s where you’d be wrong - lots of us belief that speech should not be a cause for arrest except in the most extreme circumstances. Hurting someone’s feelings is not that
what is an extreme circumstance?
At least in the UK, hate speech is a crime and is punishable by law, whether people agree or disagree is irrelevant, I do believe that if it's illegal on the street it should be illegal online, obviously in the relevant jurisdiction.
I don't know. You can bet these people were being obnoxious sh*ts to teachers and trying to rally some online mob to get their way. No much sympathy from me, even if arrest (and not a stern telling off and being told to set a good example for their kids and behave like adults) was a bit much.
Yeah I can imagine, I know the sort, however you can't really assume that as you don't know them, people have a right to be upset if their children's education is at stake and in some cases the schools management can be the 'obnoxious sh*ts'.
What is clear though is there has been some abuse of power by the police. I wondered if someone at the school 'knows' someone in the police, which made it go so far.
Perhaps the reasoning is not that you will abuse it. But could other people abuse it and use it against you.
If you try to paste anything into the dev tools in Chrome, it forces you to specifically allow pasting because scammers have convinced people to do it over the phone to con them into something. How I’m not quite sure.
Security concerns are one thing that hold Shortcuts back, but a lot of the stuff just doesn't work. It's pretty half assed. For example, sending messages is broken and according to forum posts has been for a few years.
It's pretty obvious that automation for non-developers is not a priority at Apple.
You spend more in by fuel driving there more often. As well as wasting your own time.