Yep. Got a text from my sister-in-law asking if I felt it. Um…no. It was 800 miles away. That’s like asking if I felt an earthquake in Salt Lake City.
It’s a big state!
Which was- Tidal wave.
Hundreds of people in the Sacramento area told the USGS they felt it.
But it is true that earthquakes don’t travel as far in California.
“Tidal wave” is crappy because the waves have nothing to do with tides. “Harbor wave” is better because the wave is only noticeable when it reaches shallow water. Yes, it does not need to be literally in a harbor, but a shallow ocean depth is critical to produce the effect, and it seems clear enough that that’s what “harbor” means in this context.
But they occur in Tidal areas, i.e the ocean. The Term “tidal” doesnt mean they are caused by tides, just like the term "Harbor doesnt mean they are caused by harbors.
I remember those amazing swimming pool complexes when I lived in Germany many years ago. Most metropolitan areas seemed to have at least one.
Ok, I have something that infuriates me. Why can’t we as a society here in the U.S. have publicly-funded amenities like they have in the rest of the civilized world?
Not in the U.S., although I remember this as well when I lived in Germany.
Unfortunately, this is not something that is done or understood here in the U.S. People do recognize flashing one’s high beams at them as a signal to move over out of the left lane, but more often than not take it as jerkish behavior and react as such (including intentionally slowing down even more and/or refusing to move over).
A flashing left turn signal would only be recognized as you forgetting to turn it off, as opposed to a signal that you wanted to pass them.
Which has nothing to do with tides.
So pointing out that tsunamis aren’t limited to harbors doesn’t make “tidal wave” a better term. And “seismic wave”, as I said earlier, includes so much other stuff that, as both I and @markn_1 said, a word specifically for the water-flooding-land manifestation is needed.
One thing that has infuriated me on more than one occasion, with people with whom I get along well otherwise:
How quiet it is here! Don‘t you think it is most relaxing how quiet it is here in the woods, with just some distant bird calls? I very much enjoy the peace and quiet. Oh, for more time in such a quiet place! Don‘t you like the quiet atmosphere too? No sound of civilisation. I like that quiet very much. A good thing we are in this quiet place and can relax, don‘t you think.
(continued in my fantasies: Why are you looking at me in that way? Help! ::sound of being throttled::)
This may actually point to a serious enough problem that it doesn’t qualify for this thread, but here goes:
For weeks now, it’s been happening occasionally that we’ll be about two-thirds of the way through a YouTube news video when it’s suddenly replaced by an East Asian woman knitting. There’s no text or narration, although occasionally you hear her saying something in what I assume is Chinese. Sometimes the P.O.V. indicates that she’s wearing a headcam of some sort, and sometimes you see her from the front. She knits little animals and fruits like strawberries. We never get to see the rest of the video we intended to watch.
And this goes on for the rest of the video. We watch mostly left-of-center content providers, but I’ve heard it happens with right wing news providers as well. As far as I can tell, it only happens when we’re watching the video on a TV via a Roku stick.
The infuriating part is that I can’t find a definitive explanation of what’s going on. Oh yeah, and also that someone somewhere may be hacking our communications infrastructure, which is more than a little disconcerting.
Are these videos that are copywritten news programs? Possibly it could be some kind of way to bypass YouTube’s copy protection filter. Sometimes if I have to watch Jeopardy on YouTube the uploader will add odd visual things to the video so it doesn’t get flagged.
I’m sure they are under copyright, but I have no reason to suspect that the videos were posted to YouTube by anyone other than the entities that own them.
Such as?
Pools? Many cities have a public pool.
They occur in tidal areas.
If you live in the US, you should know that there’s no sense in talking about “publicly funded amenities “ in the US as a whole. Government services are very local and one municipality might have a public funded professional fire department , pools and a public library system while just over the border there’s no pool, no library and a volunteer fire department that only puts out fires if the owner paid their dues.
This right here:
I really do want to sign on to petitions I agree with, and sometimes that’s all I can do. But a lot of campaigns and advocacy groups use this form, and it’s infuriating.
Why, you ask?
Well, before you even get to this form, you have to fill out your name, address, and email.
When this form appears, you have to fill in your phone number twice and your title three times. (Why didn’t they have me enter that on the previous page?)
You may be thinking that all of this does seem rather annoying, but not all that much of a problem, and I agree. If what I’ve described so far were the only problem, I wouldn’t care enough to post about it.
They want you to sign onto a petition directed to three people–two Senators and one Representative. For each recipient you have to choose a letter topic from a dropdown menu. You can’t leave it blank and you can’t fill it in on your own, although “other” does exist as a choice–once.
So let’s say I pick “Labor” as the topic for the Jeff Merkley letter.
The next Senator is Ron Wyden. When I access the topic dropdown menu for him, “Labor” is no longer available, because each topic can only be used one time. So I might pick “Other”.
Next is Val Hoyle, and when I access the dropdown menu for her–and you probably see where I’m going here – “Labor” and “Other” are no longer available.
It’s the SAME TOPIC for all three letters, so why do we have to pick a topic three times, and why do we have to pick two different and irrelevant topics for the second and third recipients?
This is the worst UI I have seen for this purpose, and yes it is infuriating. It offends every concept I have of good UI design, and it’s become almost impossible to avoid because so many organizations and campaigns are using it. Frankly, when I see this form after clicking on “Sign” or “Add Your Name”, I just back out. It’s a hard pass.
In a related vein, some social media sites (Quora, for example) have eliminated the ability to expand avatars, because apparently being able to actually see the pictures that people post of themselves endangers privacy. I do understand why some people don’t want to have their true appearance available in a public profile, but in that case why not just put up a photo of something else? AFAIK none of these sites requires you to use an accurate depiction of yourself.
The other aspect of this is that it’s unfair to those who do want to use photos of themselves as their avatars, and in particular those who went to significant effort to create a unique image.
Hotels.
Now I actually like staying in them. But for the love of god, why is the freaking door to the room so hard to push open. Sure, it should close automatically for security, but sheeeeessss. I’m 6’3" 225 lbs. I really struggle with the hotel door that I’m in right now. I just put my shoulder into it and push. And of course you are also wrangling a bag or two.
If I was diminutive and 80 years old, ain’t no way I could open the door.
And on the same hotel subject, I use their free shampoo. I’m not picky.
It’s not so bad now that I don’t need reading glasses, but sheesss. They put their brand name on the container in big, bold letters, and then in tiny letters ‘Shampoo’ or ‘Conditioner’. ‘Body Wash’. When I wore reading glasses I had a 33.3% of picking the right one.
“Many” cities may have a public pool, but most do not, at least here in New England. Or if they do they are either expensive, or restricted to residents of the local municipality, or both. They are also invariably small and not suitable for serious lap swimming.
I am a swimmer, so I am well aware of what pools are available for lap swimming. About the best I can do is a crappy 4-lane YMCA pool 25 miles from my house that is too small and not really suitable for workouts because they keep the water much too warm.
Contrast this to Germany, where I used to live when I was younger (as a U.S. Army “brat”), which has very elaborate pool complexes all over the place, like the one posted by @Mops upthread:
I have lived all over the U.S. and I have never seen any public pool complex that comes anywhere close to this. The closest I’ve seen in my area is the pool complex at MIT, which is open to the public, but of course it costs money because it’s located at a private university. It’s also two hours away from my house, so not practical to use for daily workouts.
And the linked pool complex is not unique to Reutlingen, Germany. Just about every metropolitan area in Germany has something similar.
Why can’t we have this here?
And this is the answer. In general, Americans do not like paying for things that don’t benefit them directly. This is seen in my town, again with respect to a pool. When they redesigned the high school back in the early ‘90s, it included a swimming pool that could be used by the students as well as the public when the students weren’t using it. The school was expensive enough to require a public referendum, and they included the pool as a separate line item because of local opposition to the cost of a pool, which was regarded as a frivolous expense. Both referenda initially passed. But people opposed to the pool kept forcing additional referenda (at least three) until it eventually failed. So we still have no pool in town.