Are you part of the "Culture of Fear"?

[deuxdiesel]

The day that people stop using the "r" word to describe other people who do things they don't agree with is the day they will stop looking foolish. Still use the "n" word to describe people of African decent as well?

[Scotty]

The day that people stop using the "r" word to describe other people who do things they don't agree with is the day they will stop looking foolish. Still use the "n" word to describe people of African decent as well?

The Fear Mongers and the PC Police are one and the same.

[deuxdiesel]

Do you even have kids? If not, why do you care so much how others raise their children? If so, what gives you the right to impose your beliefs of raising children on others? BTW, have you ever worked with mentally challenged children? Doubtful, because if you had, you would understand just how cruel and demeaning the word "retard" is.

[Tom L.]

well, having actually HIT a tree (yes, my own careless fault ) wearing a helmet allowed me to live and heal and learn from my initial carelessness and stupidity to continue to ride on.....

had I not had a helmet, well, I'd probably be drooling now and NOT typing this post

I think there's a difference between prudent or due diligence and "culture of fear"

Sounds like a darn good idea that you wear a helmet, Dennis.

I'd argue that based on open and closed head injury statistics, it'd be "prudent" for folks to wear helmets while cleaning leaves out of their gutters. It'd also be prudent to wear a helmet while driving regardless of whether you wear a seat belt or have air bags. That said, how many foam-at-the-mouth-helmet-advocate cyclists wouldn't dream of wearing a lid for such activities? It is the logical inconsistency of argument, combined with the "over the top" fervor that the cycling subculture helmet nazis exhibit that I have a problem with. It is like a mental disorder that afflicts the cycling subculture. Maybe they've bumped their collective heads?

There was a link off a link from your original story that has a video is related in a unusual way. In the case of supermarket checkouts the fastest way to check out and get you quickly out of the store is to have one line feeding all cashiers. Stores don't often do this because customers don't like it. And of course the stores generally pander to the customer's erroneous notions just as nearly all politicians and most commercial entities selling things to people do. Hence we don't get the benefits of actual scientific studies and experimental results (like if bike helmets actually do increase safety) we perennially get results in many areas that pander to people's erroneous fearful notions and of the advocates of predetermined positions.

[Scotty]

Hence we don't get the benefits of actual scientific studies and experimental results (like if bike helmets actually do increase safety) we perennially get results in many areas that pander to people's erroneous fearful notions and of the advocates of predetermined positions.

People evolved in a non scientific environment where "intuition" and "common sense" guided the individual (along with societal prejudices and norms. People are predisposed genetically to make stupid decisions that aren't based on facts.

After all, if everyone payed attention to science and stuff we'd all be athiests, we'd have universal health care, there'd be no global warming and every kid would attend a well funded public school. Instead, the few who've pulled themselves out of the gutter of human ignorance have to deal with the mess made by the rest.

[cramer]

There was a link off a link from your original story that has a video is related in a unusual way. In the case of supermarket checkouts the fastest way to check out and get you quickly out of the store is to have one line feeding all cashiers. Stores don't often do this because customers don't like it. And of course the stores generally pander to the customer's erroneous notions just as nearly all politicians and most commercial entities selling things to people do. Hence we don't get the benefits of actual scientific studies and experimental results (like if bike helmets actually do increase safety) we perennially get results in many areas that pander to people's erroneous fearful notions and of the advocates of predetermined positions.

I don't consider picking the fastest checkout lane to be a completely random / chance proposition. A little attention to details improves your odds greatly.

[Tom L.]

There was a link off a link from your original story that has a video is related in a unusual way. In the case of supermarket checkouts the fastest way to check out and get you quickly out of the store is to have one line feeding all cashiers. Stores don't often do this because customers don't like it. And of course the stores generally pander to the customer's erroneous notions just as nearly all politicians and most commercial entities selling things to people do. Hence we don't get the benefits of actual scientific studies and experimental results (like if bike helmets actually do increase safety) we perennially get results in many areas that pander to people's erroneous fearful notions and of the advocates of predetermined positions.

I don't consider picking the fastest checkout lane to be a completely random / chance proposition. A little attention to details improves your odds greatly.

Herein lies a lot of our problems. A lot, maybe most, people think they're smarter than everyone else, facts be damned. Hopefully you're not a network or telecommunications planner.

[cramer]

Herein lies a lot of our problems. A lot, maybe most, people think they're smarter than everyone else, facts be damned.

I don't think I'm smarter than everyone, but I know that I'm smarter than the vast majority of people. You don't have to be smarter than everyone else to pick the fastest checkout lane though. Being more observant is actually more valuable than intelligence for this task IMO.

Hopefully you're not a network or telecommunications planner.

Funny.... I can say that being intelligent and paying attention helps in this field also. Building a network is like building a bridge. Anyone can engineer a network (or bridge) capable of handling all of the traffic, the key (as shown in the video) is to be able to build one that can barely handle all of the traffic.

[Tom L.]

Herein lies a lot of our problems. A lot, maybe most, people think they're smarter than everyone else, facts be damned.

I don't think I'm smarter than everyone, but I know that I'm smarter than the vast majority of people. You don't have to be smarter than everyone else to pick the fastest checkout lane though. Being more observant is actually more valuable than intelligence for this task IMO.

You could be "smarter than the vast majority of people" but the mathematical odds determined through rational analysis are that a single line feeding all checkouts will get you and everyone else through the checkout line the quickest no matter how good you are at picking the single best checkout line. I think a similar situation has been proven to exist when a two lane road traffic narrows to one lane. Everyone should go all the way down to the end and go one car from each lane but people never do that. They start getting over a long way from the merge point then won't let anyone else in. Determining if wearing bicycle helmets actually increase safety is a lot more complex than all this but who cares? The helmet zealots already know what's best for everyone.

[pfox90]

Vote:

Who is smarter Tom L. or cramer?

Oh wait who gives a s*#@.

[dennismurphy]

There was a link off a link from your original story that has a video is related in a unusual way. In the case of supermarket checkouts the fastest way to check out and get you quickly out of the store is to have one line feeding all cashiers. Stores don't often do this because customers don't like it. And of course the stores generally pander to the customer's erroneous notions just as nearly all politicians and most commercial entities selling things to people do. Hence we don't get the benefits of actual scientific studies and experimental results (like if bike helmets actually do increase safety) we perennially get results in many areas that pander to people's erroneous fearful notions and of the advocates of predetermined positions.

I don't consider picking the fastest checkout lane to be a completely random / chance proposition. A little attention to details improves your odds greatly.

Apu on the Simpsons showed Marge how to pick the fastest moving lane ( I avoid checkout lanes behind older folks who will be writing a check - that' so 70s )

[pfox90]

I always steer away from older folks whether they are buying or the cashier.

[cramer]

the mathematical odds determined through rational analysis are that a single line feeding all checkouts will get you and everyone else through the checkout line the quickest no matter how good you are at picking the single best checkout line.

Wrong. The mathematical odds determined through rational analysis suggests that a single line feeding all checkouts will get the average person through the checkout line the quickest. Ever played poker? A lot of people think that's a math problem also.

[cramer]

There was a link off a link from your original story that has a video is related in a unusual way. In the case of supermarket checkouts the fastest way to check out and get you quickly out of the store is to have one line feeding all cashiers. Stores don't often do this because customers don't like it. And of course the stores generally pander to the customer's erroneous notions just as nearly all politicians and most commercial entities selling things to people do. Hence we don't get the benefits of actual scientific studies and experimental results (like if bike helmets actually do increase safety) we perennially get results in many areas that pander to people's erroneous fearful notions and of the advocates of predetermined positions.

I don't consider picking the fastest checkout lane to be a completely random / chance proposition. A little attention to details improves your odds greatly.

Apu on the Simpsons showed Marge how to pick the fastest moving lane ( I avoid checkout lanes behind older folks who will be writing a check - that' so 70s )

I never saw that episode but yes, old people are to be avoided. It's not just the check writing either, they often watch the prices like a hawk and then when they misunderstand a sale, they have a debate with the cashier over what the price should be. They also use a lot of coupons and end up debating over how those are applied too. I avoid people that look like they are going to pay with food stamps also. I've never seen someone pay with food stamps and only have one order to ring up. They always have a second order that they pay for with their own money which includes lottery tickets, dog food and beer. It's interesting that people who supposedly can't afford to feed themselves are so often able to feed a pet though... but that's another topic.

You need to also look in the carts to see what people are buying. A full cart of tiny items will take longer to ring up than a full cart of just a few items that are all the same.

Another thing I like to do is watch for the manager. Several times I see him getting agitated as the lines stack up and he will then either temporarily open up a lane himself or find someone from customer service and have them open up another lane. If you're paying attention, you can get the jump on everyone else when this happens and be first in line. I kind of glance at the guy and look at my watch nervously if he's looking my way too, sometimes he will wave me over specifically before he opens the new line.

[Tom L.]

Apu on the Simpsons showed Marge how to pick the fastest moving lane ( I avoid checkout lanes behind older folks who will be writing a check - that' so 70s )

The comparison to a fictional cartoon world is an apt one because that's the world most of us live in while we're isolating ourselves and imagining we're defending themselves from harm. A good example would be the airport scanners that supposedly "increase our safety" while we have absolutely no proof of it. Social amplification of risk turns us all into Homer Simpson-like human beings.