|
Vegetable posted:Are people with PharmD degrees called doctors? Probably not for the same reason lawyers aren't called doctors.
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 04:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 23:20 |
|
|
Unless he means the honorific, in which case some Pharm Ds and the like will go by Dr. So and so, depending on context and person. Pharm D is a particular case because it's the entry level degree for a retail pharmacist apparently, but also for those following a clinical or academic career path.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 04:41
|
|
|
In what context would PharmD holders be called doctors though? I get that PhD holders in academia and education can claim that term with no controversy. I can't really see a context where PharmD holders can do that without it being confusing or tacky.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 04:48
|
|
|
Any recommendations for a decent free OCR program for Windows?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 08:55
|
|
|
axolotl farmer posted:Any recommendations for a decent free OCR program for Windows? My wife did some trick with OneNote or Google docs when I needed to copy some stuff from an email a student had thoughtfully printed out for me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 10:29
|
|
|
turbomoose posted:When I wear noise canceling headphones I swear I get some sort of interference right before / right as certain types of cell phones get text messages. It's a pretty loud stuttering sound. Is there a name for this type of thing, or is it maybe just my own confirmation bias? As far as I know, there's no name for it but it's pretty common knowledge. Even GTA 4 actually had it built into the game where the ingame radio would have interference before getting a text.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 10:36
|
|
|
thrakkorzog posted:As far as I know, there's no name for it but it's pretty common knowledge. Even GTA 4 actually had it built into the game where the ingame radio would have interference before getting a text. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1mlponX_jw
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 10:41
|
|
|
Vegetable posted:In what context would PharmD holders be called doctors though? I get that PhD holders in academia and education can claim that term with no controversy. I can't really see a context where PharmD holders can do that without it being confusing or tacky. I assume PharmDs teach little aspiring PharmDs, maybe they call their instructors/profs doctor? If they're in academia then why wouldn't they be called Dr. like any other academic with a doctorate?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 14:29
|
|
|
Vegetable posted:In what context would PharmD holders be called doctors though? I get that PhD holders in academia and education can claim that term with no controversy. I can't really see a context where PharmD holders can do that without it being confusing or tacky. My favorite thing to do is call a doctor MR so and so because they get so pissed off about it. I don't care how much money you spent or what degree you have I will still call you Mr rear end in a top hat. Most doctors in the US are the scum of the earth. They do not care about their patients like doctors did back in the olden days. Now all they care about are what big drug company is buying their next yacht.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
Trastion posted:My favorite thing to do is call a doctor MR so and so because they get so pissed off about it. I don't care how much money you spent or what degree you have I will still call you Mr rear end in a top hat. Most doctors in the US are the scum of the earth. They do not care about their patients like doctors did back in the olden days. Now all they care about are what big drug company is buying their next yacht. This is a completely reasonable and well-justified post.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 14:57
|
|
|
I just call people by their family names, no honorifics, no fucks given edit: gently caress'em
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 14:58
|
|
|
I'm not sure if this is the right thread for this, but hopefully someone can point me in the right direction: My family is trying to get insurance for an apartment in Miami that we rent out around half the year. The idea is to cover general damages, including wind/water damage since it's an area prone to hurricanes/severe weather. We got a quote from an insurance broker (Brown & Brown of Florida Inc), but we honestly have no idea how to evaluate what we're being offered. Are there any resources I can read up on to see what I should be looking out for in these types of insurances? I generally feel like insurance companies are literally satan and are looking to gently caress you in the rear end as much as possible, so this is stressing me out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 15:50
|
|
|
Get another quote?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 15:53
|
|
|
Driver etiquette (or law? I'm in PA) question. Consider the scenario I've lovingly illustrated below:  Two cars are approaching an intersection with four-way stop signs. Driver A reaches the intersection first, and a pedestrian crosses in front of him. Driver B reaches the intersection as the pedestrian is in the street in front of Driver A. Should Driver B wait for the pedestrian to cross and allow Driver A to take his turn through the intersection first, or is it all right (or legally allowed) for Driver B to come to a stop at his stop sign and then proceed through the intersection before the pedestrian has finished crossing through the intersection? I'm the pedestrian in this situation. I walk to and from work along a street with four-way stops at every corner and every day encounter this scenario at least 2-3 times. The vast majority of the time, Driver B goes through the intersection before Driver A, which seems unfair to me. My thought is that Driver A got there first, it sucks for everyone that I'm crossing the street and delaying the proceedings, but Driver B should hold his horses and let Driver A go first. Is this not the case? Rabbit Hill fucked around with this message at 17:39 on Jan 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
Rabbit Hill posted:Driver etiquette (or law? I'm in PA) question. I think legally Driver A has to wait for the pedestrian to fully exit the crosswalk before proceeding. That means either Driver B waits an absurdly long time or just goes before Driver A. I would say Driver B going first is fine etiquette since it's not making Driver A really wait at all. They already have to wait so no sense in making two people wait.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
From a cover-your-rear end standpoint, if by the time I had fully stopped, driver A could hit me mid-intersection without running over the pedestrian, I would wait. Otherwise I would go.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
Rabbit Hill posted:Driver etiquette (or law? I'm in PA) question. b should go right away and seems ridiculous to me you would think that would be unfair. The pedestrian being in the road cancels out any right car a has to go first.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
Really? Isn't the rule "whoever gets there first goes first"?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
Vegetable posted:In what context would PharmD holders be called doctors though? I get that PhD holders in academia and education can claim that term with no controversy. I can't really see a context where PharmD holders can do that without it being confusing or tacky. I have a friend who is a PharmD. She said the only time she is called Dr. or calls another PharmD Dr. is either while drinking with them or in a purely academic setting related to their specific field. Not even her PharmD supervisor or colleagues at work (non academic) are called/get called doctor. It's Mr/Ms/Mrs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
Rabbit Hill posted:Really? Isn't the rule "whoever gets there first goes first"? In general, yes, but if the one who gets there first can't go for some reason (pedestrian, car explodes, etc.), then it's fine for the next person who's able to go to do so (if safe). IANAL, nor do I live in Pennsylvania.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 18:36
|
|
|
Rabbit Hill posted:Really? Isn't the rule "whoever gets there first goes first"? I'd go one further than the others and say Car B has an obligation to go first, so that traffic doesn't slow down because of some strange sense of morality.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 18:40
|
|
|
Yeah, car B would be an rear end in a top hat not to go if there were more cars behind him. If A can't go anyway then B should.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 18:59
|
|
|
By such a rigid interpretation of "the rules", Car A could just park there and stop all traffic forever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
That would make my life as a pedestrian so much easier.  I'm lucky if anyone stops at all, even while I'm in the middle of the street.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
Grundulum posted:Question 1 It's kind of a duct tape solution but would it be possible to use a couple virtual drives up to letter E: so your printer would only ever use drive letter F:? Otherwise disk management should work but if you're constantly unplugging it I don't know if it'd "remember" it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 20:42
|
|
|
Rabbit Hill posted:Really? Isn't the rule "whoever gets there first goes first"? In every major city I've ever lived in, driver B is expected to just go in this scenario. Other drivers get confused and/or angry if driver B waits.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 21:40
|
|
|
armorer posted:In every major city I've ever lived in, driver B is expected to just go in this scenario. Other drivers get confused and/or angry if driver B waits. As well they should, since traffic laws exist to facilitate the safe and efficient flow of traffic and not mindless adherence to some bizarre system of morality.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 22:23
|
|
|
Knightmare posted:It's kind of a duct tape solution but would it be possible to use a couple virtual drives up to letter E: so your printer would only ever use drive letter F:? Otherwise disk management should work but if you're constantly unplugging it I don't know if it'd "remember" it. The even more duct-tape solution is to just unplug the printer any time I need to compile a program. v  v At least until I get my research budget and can afford a compiler that isn't free.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 22:35
|
|
|
Grundulum posted:Question 1 http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/change-add-remove-drive-letter#1TC=windows-7
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 23:44
|
|
|
Rabbit Hill posted:Consider the scenario I've lovingly illustrated below: Knightmare posted:It's kind of a duct tape solution but would it be possible to use a couple virtual drives up to letter E: so your printer would only ever use drive letter F:? Otherwise disk management should work but if you're constantly unplugging it I don't know if it'd "remember" it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2015 02:49
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:What a weird setup. Why aren't there traffic lights there? What happens if two people show up at about the same time? Four way stops are very common in the US and usually if two people stop at the same time, someone will just go for it. Occasionally there's a few false starts if both people are feeling particularly unsure of themselves. However, the Wikipedia article for all way stops says that the person on the right hand side of the other has the right-of-way but I'm not sure I get what that means.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:What a weird setup. Why aren't there traffic lights there? What happens if two people show up at about the same time? Not everyone lives where there needs to be traffic lights. Most of this county gets by on stop signs just fine, because there isn't enough traffic to warrant anything more. Speaking for PA traffic law, pedestrians have the right of way. Period. Then whoever got there first in a vehicle gets to go. If that's unclear or two cars arrive at the same time it's whoever is to the right. Hummingbirds posted:the person on the right hand side of the other has the right-of-way but I'm not sure I get what that means. Are there multiple people in the intersection that arrived at the same time and one of them is directly to your right? You don't have the right of way. No one is to your right? You have the right of way. It's pretty uncommon for four people to show up at exactly the same time and at that point someone will just go for it and the rest (should) sort itself out going by the "right has right of way" rule. Motronic fucked around with this message at 03:03 on Jan 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2015 02:57
|
|
|
Hummingbirds posted:Four way stops are very common in the US and usually if two people stop at the same time, someone will just go for it. Occasionally there's a few false starts if both people are feeling particularly unsure of themselves. However, the Wikipedia article for all way stops says that the person on the right hand side of the other has the right-of-way but I'm not sure I get what that means. Car A would be on the right hand side, because nothing is to the right of car A.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2015 02:58
|
|
|
Motronic posted:Not everyone lives where there needs to be traffic lights. Most of this county gets by on stop signs just fine, because there isn't enough traffic to warrant anything more. We have stop signs too, it's just that we only ever have them on one axis of the intersection. You know, so everyone knows who has right of way without having to play chicken. We also have a whole lot of roundabouts, which force everyone to play nicely.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2015 03:18
|
|
|
Organza Quiz posted:You know, so everyone knows who has right of way without having to play chicken. That's not what happens where I live. The general progression for a 4 way intersection is 1.) stop signs for one direction and if traffic builds 2.) 4 say stop and if traffic builds more 3.) lights. This is cheap and easy as needed and people who live in and around this area seem to generally not have an issue with it. Nobody is "playing chicken", especially when people KNOW THE BASIC loving TRAFFIC RULES of the place they are driving. Of course there are terrible drivers, as there are everywhere. But in the overwhelming majority of times this works out just fine. This isn't a judgement about what system or systems are better, but rather to note that when everyone is familiar with a particular setup and knows how to behave in it things generally work out pretty well. Safe driving has a lot to do with having a reasonable expectation that other vehicles on the road will follow the same rules and conventions that you are following.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2015 03:32
|
|
|
Turtlicious posted:Car A would be on the right hand side, because nothing is to the right of car A. Motronic posted:Are there multiple people in the intersection that arrived at the same time and one of them is directly to your right? You don't have the right of way. No one is to your right? You have the right of way. I guess I'm wondering what happens if two people directly across the intersection stop at the same time. That's the situation in which I've seen the chicken thing happen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2015 03:49
|
|
|
Hummingbirds posted:I guess I'm wondering what happens if two people directly across the intersection stop at the same time. That's the situation in which I've seen the chicken thing happen. The person going straight has the right of way over the one who would be turning left (because if they were both going straight there'd be no conflict.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2015 03:57
|
|
|
Yeah person going straight has right of way, the only time there is an issue is when you turn without signalling, really.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2015 03:58
|
|
|
Thanks! You learn something every day.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2015 04:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 23:20 |
|
|
Motronic posted:Not everyone lives where there needs to be traffic lights. Most of this county gets by on stop signs just fine, because there isn't enough traffic to warrant anything more. No, at a 4 way stop if one leg is blocked by a pedestrian, another car in the intersection in a direction that's not blocked gets right of way while the pedestrian is crossing. Hummingbirds posted:I guess I'm wondering what happens if two people directly across the intersection stop at the same time. That's the situation in which I've seen the chicken thing happen. If neither has their blinkers on and therefore neither will cross the other's path (or if both of them are turning right) then they can go at the same time. There's no chance of conflict.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2015 04:08
|
|