TTIM: Things That Irk Me

[NewConvert]

Any other Latinos on this forum?

[HeartFc]

14 hours ago, NewConvert said:

Any other Latinos on this forum?

Not for long...

[ecguymer]

TTIM: taking the best part of 2 hours longer to get home than it should have due to public transport being especially retarded......

[jw1739]

TTIM: Repeated claims that we played 3 matches in 6 days. We didn't, it was 7 days.

[Baka1]

TTIM: Lag

[strider]

ttim: being called "Mr" or "sir". i don't associate with your backward society's pronouns. 

i am a xe

[NewConvert]

3 hours ago, strider said:

ttim: being called "Mr" or "sir". i don't associate with your backward society's pronouns. 

i am a xe

Soon, very soon, you will get the "Are these a bit young for you to wear sir?" from a shop assistant.

[HeartFc]

http://gender.wikia.com/wiki/Gender_Wiki

Im disappointed my suggestion of Salami-Sexual was knocked back. 

Its a person who identifies as a hybrid male/spicy small goods gender who was born with the wrong genitals. The individual feels as if their penis which appears as human genitalia is actually salami. The salami can range from anything from your spicy premium Hungarian from the local yugo deli to your standard mild coles/woolies. These individuals live a bitter/sweet/spicy life, particularly homosexual salami-sexuals, they can't help but feel extremely aroused when visiting the local deli and having a choice of 13 cocks to eat for lunch. 

Apparently heterosexual salami-sexuals have amazing sex with women who have yeasty vaginas and use butter as lube. 

Fuck, im hungry.

[jw1739]

TTIM: The Australian version of Christmas. I'm in "Christmas overload" already.

[Dylan]

6 hours ago, jw1739 said:

TTIM: The Australian version of Christmas. I'm in "Christmas overload" already.

Im overloaded at the start of November 

[hakz7]

TTIM: Football fans who have a go at Red Bull Leipzig for being a 'franchise' and saying the only reason they're doing so well is because of money even though they probably couldn't name a single one of their players. 

[Tesla]

11 hours ago, hakz7 said:

TTIM: Football fans who have a go at Red Bull Leipzig for being a 'franchise' and saying the only reason they're doing so well is because of money even though they probably couldn't name a single one of their players. 

LOL so much this. The most retarded thing is their budget would be a fraction of Bayern and Dortmund.

[Hellenic Hero]

TTIM: People who don't vote and then complain about the results. 

 

[NewConvert]

TTIM: The Tulla freeway. I can't recall the last time there wasn't any roadworks on it.

[jw1739]

15 minutes ago, NewConvert said:

TTIM: The Tulla freeway. I can't recall the last time there wasn't any roadworks on it.

I suspect that you could say that about almost every infrastructure project in Melbourne, and possibly Victoria. What shits me is that work on these projects takes almost forever. We have an abysmal record on infrastructure delivery. That sinkhole in Japan was repaired and the road opened again in a week; I hate to think how long that would have taken in Melbourne.

Edited December 11, 2016 by jw1739

[NewConvert]

9 hours ago, jw1739 said:

I suspect that you could say that about almost every infrastructure project in Melbourne, and possibly Victoria. What shits me is that work on these projects takes almost forever. We have an abysmal record on infrastructure delivery. That sinkhole in Japan was repaired and the road opened again in a week; I hate to think how long that would have taken in Melbourne.

Ahh Japan. It also took them about 18 months to dig a tunnel under Tokyo, install a new Train line complete with underground stations, expand a train station with a fully weather protected platform and all without disturbing the traffic above. All of this done with a highly paid, unionized workforce. In that time we would still be scratching our arses.

[jw1739]

3 hours ago, NewConvert said:

Ahh Japan. It also took them about 18 months to dig a tunnel under Tokyo, install a new Train line complete with underground stations, expand a train station with a fully weather protected platform and all without disturbing the traffic above. All of this done with a highly paid, unionized workforce. In that time we would still be scratching our arses.

There are plenty of other examples I'm sure. Although a long time in gestation, and not yet in full operation, the Crossrail project in London involves some awe-inspiring engineering. Systems that I've used are the Docklands Light Railway in London, and the MTR in Hong Kong. Just so good.

[Tesla]

TTIM first it was FB, now every fucking app wants to integrate their own Web browser. Fuck off just open it in my default browser.

Why does it irk me? For starters there a huge fucking bar at the top taking up like 15% if the screen. 

[Jimmy]

1 hour ago, Tesla said:

TTIM first it was FB, now every fucking app wants to integrate their own Web browser. Fuck off just open it in my default browser.

Why does it irk me? For starters there a huge fucking bar at the top taking up like 15% if the screen. 

Their browser is shit and doesn't even have tabs. Just fuck off Zucc.

[strider]

Ttim: "fully equipped gym" usually translates to "one treadmill, one leg press and a lat pulldown machine".

Fucking hotels man.

I'm shredding you cunts

[hakz7]

TTIM: Safari (on mobile) not having a "Open in background tab" option.

[ecguymer]

TTIM: the amount of noise that keeps being made about South Melbourne's A-League bid....

[Begbie]

TTIM: 

TTDIM: 

 

[bt50]

15 minutes ago, Begbie said:

TTIM: 

TTDIM: 

 

That's some retarded shit right there.

[jw1739]

TTIM:

40km/hr speed limits.

Organizations that won't provide me with appropriate customer service and use the excuse that their software package doesn't work that way.

[n i k o]

TTIM: People in this country trying to pander to the needs of everyone in case someone is offended. 

Edited December 23, 2016 by n i k o

[Tesla]

TTIM : when cyclists say they shouldn't have to pay rego cause they already pay it on their car. I don't know if they're trolling or just retarded. If I own two cars I pay rego for each. If you own a car and a bicycle, you should pay rego for each. 

It would probably only work out to $100-200 anyway, not like cunts on their $15k bicycles can't afford it. 

 

[strider]

3 hours ago, Tesla said:

TTIM : when cyclists say they shouldn't have to pay rego cause they already pay it on their car. I don't know if they're trolling or just retarded. If I own two cars I pay rego for each. If you own a car and a bicycle, you should pay rego for each. 

It would probably only work out to $100-200 anyway, not like cunts on their $15k bicycles can't afford it. 

 

what cars u got homeboy? i'll race you in my 6 series 

pink slips

[hedaik]

4 hours ago, Tesla said:

It would probably only work out to $100-200 anyway, not like cunts on their $15k bicycles can't afford it. 

 

Cyclists save the economy $21 with every bike trip, so I believe the Government should be paying cyclists to go on their bike.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/bike-riders-save-economy-21-on-each-commute-20130730-2qxdg.html

[cadete]

1 hour ago, hedaik said:

Cyclists save the economy $21 with every bike trip, so I believe the Government should be paying cyclists to go on their bike.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/bike-riders-save-economy-21-on-each-commute-20130730-2qxdg.html

Sure u are right...

But I'm helping as well to a lesser extent) using my vehicle of choice as well so I wish I didn't have to pay for two regos.

[hedaik]

11 minutes ago, cadete said:

Sure u are right...

But I'm helping as well to a lesser extent) using my vehicle of choice as well so I wish I didn't have to pay for two regos.

Yeah I agree its an illogical argument. 

[jw1739]

2 hours ago, hedaik said:

Cyclists save the economy $21 with every bike trip, so I believe the Government should be paying cyclists to go on their bike.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/bike-riders-save-economy-21-on-each-commute-20130730-2qxdg.html

Depends how you structure the argument. It could be argued that if a cycle path cost $1.5bn per km to construct, you are going to build the road anyway so the cycle path is costing $1.5bn per km extra so the government would save that money if nobody cycles at all...

Overall IMO we shouldn't be reducing arguments about cycling, walking etc. down to an economic one. There's so much more involved than that.

[hedaik]

47 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

Depends how you structure the argument. It could be argued that if a cycle path cost $1.5bn per km to construct, you are going to build the road anyway so the cycle path is costing $1.5bn per km extra so the government would save that money if nobody cycles at all...

Well thats a flawed argument as thats based on cycle paths costing the same as roads to build and maintain which they clearly arent. Much better economically to have people using the cheaper mode of transport. 

 

47 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

Overall IMO we shouldn't be reducing arguments about cycling, walking etc. down to an economic one. There's so much more involved than that.

I agree, but I think economics are a valid point to raise when people bring up registration for bicycles which is only going to discourage use of them and push them to more costly forms of transport such as public transport or vehicles. 

Edited December 23, 2016 by hedaik

[Tesla]

13 hours ago, hedaik said:

Cyclists save the economy $21 with every bike trip, so I believe the Government should be paying cyclists to go on their bike.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/bike-riders-save-economy-21-on-each-commute-20130730-2qxdg.html

Sounds to me like this assumes cyclists are not using the roads and are only using dedicated cycling paths, hence it's highly flawed. I think the correct way to summarise it would be, every time a cyclist uses a cycling path rather than a road it saves $21. So we should encourage cyclists to use cycling paths, one way to do that would to make a cycling registration only needed to use the roads, but not to use cycling paths.

Anyway within the next few years the biggest paradigm shift in road usage since the car was invented will happen when self-driving cars become common, which will remove the biggest inefficiency when it comes to cars: parking. So those values won't hold true for long anyway.

[hedaik]

Looking forward to being able to cycle in the middle of a highway and having automatic cars stop for everything I do 

Edited December 24, 2016 by hedaik

[Tesla]

2 hours ago, hedaik said:

Looking forward to being able to cycle in the middle of a highway and having automatic cars stop for everything I do 

Looking forward to developing custom firmware to boot onto automatic cars which causes them to search and destroy cyclists. 

[NewConvert]

On 24/12/2016 at 8:31 PM, Tesla said:

Sounds to me like this assumes cyclists are not using the roads and are only using dedicated cycling paths, hence it's highly flawed. I think the correct way to summarise it would be, every time a cyclist uses a cycling path rather than a road it saves $21. So we should encourage cyclists to use cycling paths, one way to do that would to make a cycling registration only needed to use the roads, but not to use cycling paths.

Anyway within the next few years the biggest paradigm shift in road usage since the car was invented will happen when self-driving cars become common, which will remove the biggest inefficiency when it comes to cars: parking. So those values won't hold true for long anyway.

Construction costs should be way lower for a cyclists only road vs one that has to cater for vehicles weighing up to six tons and even more for roads that cater for heavy trucks. Additionally, maintenance of roads is a big cost because of trucks. Of course that would mean no delivery of anything but when considering the costs of roads the costs of the type of vehicle that uses them and the associated maintenance costs need to be taken into account.

I have never seen any reports on road construction costs so I can't make any further comments.

[jw1739]

14 minutes ago, NewConvert said:

Construction costs should be way lower for a cyclists only road vs one that has to cater for vehicles weighing up to six tons and even more for roads that cater for heavy trucks. Additionally, maintenance of roads is a big cost because of trucks. Of course that would mean no delivery of anything but when considering the costs of roads the costs of the type of vehicle that uses them and the associated maintenance costs need to be taken into account.

I have never seen any reports on road construction costs so I can't make any further comments.

But that's a different question. It's not an either-or debate, a truck road vs. a cyclists-only road. And cost is not the only parameter to be considered in the movement of goods and people. You have to consider convenience, efficacy, efficiency etc. I'm still in favour of a system that is basically "user-pays", and on that basis I believe that cyclists should pay to use cyclist-only paths/roads.

[hedaik]

5 hours ago, jw1739 said:

But that's a different question. It's not an either-or debate, a truck road vs. a cyclists-only road. And cost is not the only parameter to be considered in the movement of goods and people. You have to consider convenience, efficacy, efficiency etc. I'm still in favour of a system that is basically "user-pays", and on that basis I believe that cyclists should pay to use cyclist-only paths/roads.

Cyclists do pay through general taxes, just as how I pay for maintenance for your street even though I've never driven on it. 

Edited December 26, 2016 by hedaik

[NewConvert]

5 hours ago, jw1739 said:

But that's a different question. It's not an either-or debate, a truck road vs. a cyclists-only road. And cost is not the only parameter to be considered in the movement of goods and people. You have to consider convenience, efficacy, efficiency etc. I'm still in favour of a system that is basically "user-pays", and on that basis I believe that cyclists should pay to use cyclist-only paths/roads.

You are correct. What I was trying to say was that if you consider costs only in isolation then the costs of cycling infrastructure would be lower than for vehicles.

The second thing is that calculating costs is not a straight forward matter - for example you say that cyclists should pay for cyclist-only paths/roads but how does the 9 year old pay when she goes on a bike ride?