"BMW 3 Series Coupe gets new engine"

Actually - it is.

BMW is making noises about the "activating of the features" for quite some time now. Wanna +30Hp? Just go to the dealership, write a nice check and get them "activated". And the twin turbo which is living under the bonnet of the 335i comes very handy.

Recently I saw a very interesting article in the "Aftersales", an internal newspaper for bmw emploees, dealers etc. It was discussing "activation" technology for the "value added options". As first example they mentioned "Night Vision", which you can order even after you buy the car. But it will only work after it is "activated". The dealership sends your VIN, the serial number of the camera and gets the activation key, which enables this particular camera to this particular car. They said they want to extend this in other areas as well. I think, that the biggest problem is the reliable encryption, yet foolproof enough to be suitable to be used remotely.

Actually I dont like it, since the next logical step is subscription. "+30Hp for the next 20000 miles or 2 years for just a $2000". "$300 for an annual subscription of Navigation". "$100 for the next 10000 miles with cruise control".....

In the US, they furnish H rated tires for the standard car. That is 205/55R16. The speed limit for H tires is 128 mph. It would not be a good idea to let the car exceed the tire rating. Jim

Personally I wouldn't remove the speed limiter - don't get a chance to drive that fast anyway. INteresting though the article says, "The limited top speed of both the 328i and the 335i is 130 mph. With the optional Sport Package on the 335i, it is 150 mph. " so without the sports package the 130 mph is way more than gentlemen.

Henry VI, Part 2. "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers." Shakespeare's characters viewed the lawyers as an impediment to their plot. Now that lawyers number over 1,000,000 in the U.S. alone, they are an impediment to EVERYTHING.

Why lawyer jokes don't work: Lawyers don't think they're funny and everybody else doesn't think they're jokes.

R / John

In the U.S., you are entitled to a risk free life and every adverse occurrence must be blamed on someone else.

R / John

"...Ironically, the rallying cry of the lawyer bashers has become Shakespeare's quote from Henry VI: "THE FIRST THING WE DO, LET'S KILL ALL THE LAWYERS."

Those who use this phrase pejoratively against lawyers are as miserably misguided about their Shakespeare as they are about the judicial system which they disdain so freely.

Even a cursory reading of the context in which the lawyer killing statement is made in King Henry VI, Part II, (Act IV), Scene 2, reveals that Shakespeare was paying great and deserved homage to our venerable profession as the front line defenders of democracy.

The accolade is spoken by Dick the Butcher, a follower of anarchist Jack Cade, whom Shakespeare depicts as "the head of an army of rabble and a demagogue pandering to the ignorant," who sought to overthrow the government. Shakespeare's acknowledgment that the first thing any potential tyrant must do to eliminate freedom is to "kill all the lawyers" is, indeed, a classic and well-deserved compliment to our distinguished profession.

Today's Jack Cades can readily be found throughout the insurance industry and in manufacturing, pharmaceutical, and chemical companies. They want to dismantle the tort system. They want to disrupt the judiciary and abrogate the common law, to the detriment of the rights of individual citizens, consumers, and injured persons who deserve competent representation and adequate redress for harm done to them."

No, I'm not a lawyer.

Uhh, yeah. You look stunning in that tinfoil hat.

In the UK there is a blanket speed limit of 70 mph - no exceptions - yet the cars come with tyres suitable for the actual top speed of the car.

My Supra TT will still take it. 8)

The appearance of the law profession amidst a society might well be the first sign of that society's progress into civilization. When that society allows that profession to co-opt every facet of its existence, that civilization faces its demise. My position is not that lawyers are bad, but rather that too many lawyers is bad.

American society would be seriously damaged if all lawyers were eliminated. But reducing their number to one suitable to handle the Jack Cades and officiate over normal civil and criminal proceedings would be beneficial. The proliferation of the lawyer class which began in the sixties resulted in thousands of underemployed practitioners who would either starve, find a different profession, or develop a market for their chosen profession. The result was the latter.

For every triumph by lawyers getting the bad guy (Vioxx perhaps, the Pinto fuel tank for sure) there are other examples that are heinous (breast implant suits, BMW's failure to report minor shipping damage repairs). Classes are represented and rewarded without any knowledge on their part. (I got 62 cents for a "defective" microwave the manufacturer repaired prior to the lawsuit ... an award for my "inconvenience," not for any damages to me ... while the law firm made a couple million. I refused to cash the check.) Lawyers who lose in court threaten appeal unless a settlement is made (if I do something like that to you, it's extortion, if a lawyer does it to you, you're screwed).

The maintenance of an overlarge legal profession places a hidden tax upon every member of society. It's rolled into the cost of everything from groceries to health care. Some of that cost is truly beneficial (less likelihood of spoiled groceries?), but much is not (tons of food is wasted, charity organizations don't get yesterday's bread). Litigation is a growth industry.

Mass execution of the lawyer class is a ridiculous rallying cry to what is a real problem. The only solution is to make it harder to become a lawyer (with a million of 'em, it's hardly an elite group) and allow attrition to follow its course. Not likely. Or perhaps you're looking forward to a world in which every human interaction requires legal counsel (we'll need ten million of them)? Better take your hat back. It's more flattering on you.

R / John

One buys a car fit for purpose. whether you choose to use it on the road or not is up to you. I would guess there is european legislation as there are parts of germany at least where it's possible to legally do the top speed of the car.

Wonder what tyres cars for the US - but picked up personally in Germany - are fitted with. ;-)

No, it certainly not the *only* solution. We don't have the problem here in Canada you yanks do down there largely due to the reasons that a) the loser pays the winners legal fees and b) contingency payments aren't legal up here (I don't think, I'm fuzzy on this)

So, it's not the lawyers per se it's the framework in which they operate.

Keep in mild also the US is unique in the world in one respect: most countried, especially in Europe put artists, scientists etc on their currency. All the faces on American paper money are lawyers.

So to some extent one is tempted to say "what do you expect when a country is by, of, and for the lawyers".

Point well taken. As their proliferation occurred through a rather bizarre form of supply-side economics, demand must be reduced. The contingency system has its benefits, the little guy can take on the big guy. It might be reasonably limited (I don't think the lawyer and his client should enjoy the windfall profit of punative damages ... they're essentially society punishing the wrongdoer, society should benefit). Loser pays would be interesting, but I suspect contingencies would just be modified to account for the additional risk to the litigator (say 50% plus expenses instead of the relatively standard 30%).

Within minutes after I read your post, I was assaulted by a tv ad from a law firm trolling for class members (faulty pacemakers and diffribulators). Sigh.

We don't have the problem

Or perhaps you just have a smaller percentage of litigators?

Washington - no Jefferson - yes Lincoln - yes Hamilton - yes Jackson - yes Grant - no Franklin - no

Lincoln (perhaps Hamilton) was the only one who made his primary mark in the practice of law.

Of course, if you go to the higher denominations, lawyers do prevail. Only Woodrow Wilson ($100K) was not (an academic instead).

Well, I guess I could always claim my dual citizenship.

R / John

Uh, yeah. and let's not forget "Dr. Legal" in the Aileen-what's her face serial killer trial.

I don't know. It would be interesting to see that statistic. I have a sense it's about the same frankly.

Right, nw try to find a Eropran country with a picture of a lawyer on its money.

I always did whe I lived in the US :-)

I don't dislike the US, it's 10X bigger in population in Canada. Your good people are oh so good but jeez you sure got some whackjobs down there. I have a lot oa lawyer friends but they're the rare "good" ones that do much more good than harm and are equally disgusted by the things you are, ergo cries of "kill all the lawyers" seems to me to ne a non-starter, or to put it another way, go ahead but please don't kill mine.