Slashdot Mirror

Odd that you go so crazy in trying to create a situation where it is morally justified to swerve you had to presume that the person swerving is such an immoral asshole that if he hits a pedestrian who dove in front of his vehicle, he'll just drive off.

Actually, the person who DID NOT swerve is the immoral asshole who chose to run over an innocent child instead of swerve into an empty oncoming lane of traffic, and the one who did NOT swerve is the one who DID have the accident and must stop. He's the only one I talked about having to stop to maintain perfect adherence to the almighty traffic rules. That you didn't realize who I was talking about tells me you didn't read, or didn't comprehend, the hypothetical situation.

The moral, decent guy who chose to break a minor traffic law to save a life doesn't need to stop because there was no accident. The "hit and run" laws don't include "miss and run".

If you had time to swerve, you had time to stop.

From this table, I see that the total stopping distance for a car going 30MPH is 109 feet. That's ten car lengths. There are many streets in my town that have onstreet parking with a 30MPH speed limit. Even with 0 reaction time, the physical distance is still 43 feet. That's four car lengths, about. If you cannot make a full change of lanes in less than ten car lengths, you don't know how to drive.

Even at 20 MPH, the stopping distance is 63 feet. Ditto changing lanes in six car lengths. But you don't have to make a full lane change, all you need to do is avoid hitting a four year old child.

So, sometimes you may be able to stop before you hit the child. Sometimes you won't be able to, and a sane, rational, ethical human being will chose a path that will save the child rather than simply run it over because someone told them the only proper thing to do was "keep going straight ahead."

There are not rows of parked cars on the freeway.

There aren't. But there are often culverts, ditches, or grassy areas close. And those animals which decide to cross sometimes think if they go fast enough they'll make it -- faster than you can stop. I've had such animals dart into my path from less than 10 feet away, much less that 109 feet I'd need to stop for them going at just 30 MPH. The table says that even with zero reaction time involved, I could go no faster than 15 MPH and I'd still hit that animal. If you think driving on I5 or I90 or any other highway at 15MPH is the right thing to do so you will never have to avoid hitting an animal by anything less than coming to a full stop, you're dangerous.

Streets that have lane-side parking have speed limits such that if you have time to turn the wheel to swerve, you'd have time to stop too.

Nope. Maybe on your planet, but not on planet Earth. "Time to turn the wheel" is milliseconds" and is for the most part "reaction time". "Time to stop" includes "reaction time" plus the physical stopping action, which can be a lot longer.

And if children are just popping randomly out from behind parked cars, and you can't see that kids are playing by the road as you approach, how the hell are you going to know if a bicycle just pulled out into the other lane and you didn't notice yet?

I see kids playing by the road all the time. Do you really stop for each and every group of them, just in case? No, you don't. Neither do I. And I'm not counting them continuously, so if one of them goes in between the parked cars I may not notice that specific detail, until they pop out into traffic.

That empty oncoming lane, if there is a bike rider in it, will be obvious. He will most likely be on the other side of the lane to begin with, and I don't need the whole lane to swerve around a child just appearing from between the cars.

So your idea of safe driving is to take the known, sure

Here is a real world example of cloud computing; http://www.csgnetwork.com/estc...

Seeing two people riding in a Hummer in the carpool lane while a single guy in a non-plugin hybrid can't be there

That still reduces congestion. Even if Hummer takes 4 times the road area when parked, relative to the smaller car, actual area occupied when the car is moving depends on the speed. A car "occupies" the area in front of it, in which area no one would feel safe to be.

I wouldn't like to be anywhere within 80 feet in front of a car doing 40 mph, in whichever enclosure I am cocooned. So even if Hummer is 40 feet long and the small car is 10 feet long, Hummer at 40 mph takes 120 feet space serving 2 people, and small car takes 90 feet serving 1 person. Hummer comes out way ahead per person.

200 feet is just a tad under the distance required to decelerate from 65 mph to zero on dry pavement. In other words, the system gives gives enough advance warning so you know what you're about to gently bump into after screaming to a stop in a cloud of smoke. Or crash into, if the pavement happens to be wet.

I'd say 10 years to mass market is optimistic.

Lets look at the possible number of passwords (so we're talking about a brute force attempt on the hashed password).

Blizzard's setup is not case sensitive, and they disallow a significant number of special characters. Lets say they have 40 possible values for each. A good password setup should have around 75 (or more).

So lets see how many possible values there are for a 7 character password in each setup:
Blizzard 4.456764032636319e+34
Good: 1.6883055225799413e+64

That's quite a difference. Lets see how many characters it would take in a Blizzard password to get into the same ballpark. Turns out its 37 which gives: 1.9782022283855447e+64

So, I guess a restricted character set is okay, if you go with REALLY long passwords.

(I used the password calculator at http://www.csgnetwork.com/optionspossiblecalc.html with 4 for a minimum length to determine those numbers).

"The VISOR detected electromagnetic signals across the entire EM spectrum between 1 Hz and 100,000 THz"

As much as I thought the VISOR was a cool concept (which got me interested in multispectral imaging back when I was a kid), unless I'm doing the math wrong, I think someone just made those numbers up (and I don't mean the Star Trek scriptwriters). 100,000 THz (100 PHz, right?) doesn't even get you all of the way through X-rays, let alone into gamma territory.

Also, is it even possible for something that small to detect radio waves of 1 Hz? That's a wavelength of 300 million meters, according to this calculator.

That's mathematically dubious.

http://www.forensicdynamics.com/stopdistcalc http://www.csgnetwork.com/stopdistcalc.html

I drive a BMW 335i. I can stop faster than that. I can nearly accelerate that fast.

Also, 20-25 feet *is* insignificant.

Get off the road before you kill someone.

Ah, glad to see the quality of discourse is being kept high and we're keeping personal attacks out of this. And this from the guy wants to teach tailgaters a lesson.

As well as the increased stopping distance, greater speed increases the chance that a touch from that tailgater causes your car to spin and take out the car you are overtaking.

And until he speeds up too, he has a larger buffer before he hits me, and there's going to be less of an opportunity for this to happen, because I'm going to be out of his way sooner, and finally, the difference in speed is literally the velocity of a typical human *walking*.

And we might not be talking broken noses. We might be talking death.

It's only increased probability of harm. But it does indicate you chose the wrong option.

Whatever, buddy. Go judge someone else. I'm done with this bullshit.

That's mathematically dubious.

http://www.forensicdynamics.com/stopdistcalc
http://www.csgnetwork.com/stopdistcalc.html

Also, 20-25 feet *is* insignificant.

Get off the road before you kill someone.

the difference between 70 and 73 isn't going to be that noticeable when my car is totaled and my nose is broken by the airbag either way.

As well as the increased stopping distance, greater speed increases the chance that a touch from that tailgater causes your car to spin and take out the car you are overtaking. And we might not be talking broken noses. We might be talking death.

It's only increased probability of harm. But it does indicate you chose the wrong option.

Those questions beg questions as well. Does fun equate to unsafe? Should it? Perhaps only to you?
Lets try something else. Do you understand that the average driver takes an additional 70 feet to stop his car when going 60 instead of 50? An additional 80 feet when 70 in place of 60? That's factoring in reaction time, so obviously there are better drivers and more efficient brakes out there. Regardless, that's pretty substantial.

Chart here.
You can enjoy something at the same time as taking it seriously. Don't be a jackass. By posing that question, you're doing nothing more than presenting a[n untenable] defense to your own bad habits.
And yes, I do make my job as enjoyable as possible. But I take is nice and easy when I'm using the forklift.

You are correct, however the 27Mhz R/C frequencies are taken right out of the middle of the Citizen's Band frequencies.

You seem to be assuming that every channel completely consumes all available bandwidth between itself and it's surrounding channels. http://www.csgnetwork.com/tvfreqtable.html It's tight, yes, but there are gaps. It's the gaps that are to be utilized.

Yellow: Stop unless you're already crossing the line when it goes yellow.

[Citation needed]

A quick sanity check would show why your statement can't possibly be true as written: Suppose you are doing 50 mph down a business district. You are six inches (or six feet or even 60 feet) shy of the intersection as the light turns yellow. Do you stop or proceed through the intersection? According to what you stated above, proceeding through the intersection would be illegal. However, at 50 mph, the vehicle takes approximately 100 feet to stop (per this site). If you try to stop, you will probably run the light anyway and you'll probably get rear ended if there is any traffic behind you. Even the most hard-core states will have a disclaimer in the yellow light law that essentially says "stop if you can, proceed if you must."

Google holds the weight of milk at '4.5 lbs/gallon'.

For what it is worth, milk is more than 90% water, which weighs in at about 9 pounds per gallon. The rest of milk is mostly fats and proteins, which are not drastically different in density than water.

A little searching around yields the density of milk to be around 1.02-1.06 g/cc (or kg/L). This translates to, you guessed it, about 9 pounds per gallon.

Also, any farmer could tell you that a hundredweight of milk (a touch over 100 pounds - go figure) is about 12 gallons.

So there's a factor of two (or one half) to muddle into your calculations.

I looked it up, subpart G
http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/cfr/1998/47cfr95.pdf
http://www.csgnetwork.com/lprsfreqtable.html

What section do those miniFM transmitters operate under for things like broadcasting your iPod in car? It doesn't look like it is Part 95.

A) The road was empty

You think the road is empty. But you can never be sure. Maybe you didn't see that kid behind the bushes, maybe there is a car in your blind spot, maybe there is a cyclist you didn't see. NEVER assume that something is the way you think it is on the road.

C) It was only a few miles over the speed limit (30 in a 25 mph zone or something silly like that).

Stupid, stupid stupid, please get off the road before you kill someone
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WiVefbS--QY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpZRxo3EWAc
To use your values: reference
Stopping distance for 25mph: 85ft
Stopping distance for 30mph: 109ft

That's almost 25ft difference that could mean life or death to someone who suddenly stood out in front of you.

Cops are all to complicit in the government's plan to extract ever more money from honest people through excessive traffic ticketing.

So tickets are merely about revenue-generation? What about the laws of physics? As a father, I know that sometimes my kids have incredibly bad judgment, and that can mean them running out in the street without thinking.

It's important to enforce speed laws because of the laws of physics. This site is consistent with what I've read elsewhere, so I'll quote it...

If you're driving down the street at 25MPH and my kid runs out in the street, you'll stop in ~85 feet. If you're going 35 MPH, you need 51 MORE feet to stop - in my neighborhood that's the length of another HOUSE! I want people driving the speed limit or less to give them the chance to stop without killing my kids or the ones across the street where the crazy people live who let their 2 year old play outside WITHOUT SUPERVISION (and yes, I've called CPS.)

traffic law enforcement is important. Ticked off about tickets? Stop speeding? I did and found that my tension level decreased, my mileage went up, and I no longer hit the brakes every time I see a police car.

It's up to you, but I'm fine with the cops writing speeding tickets.

Jet turbine power plants have have 2 SIGNIFICANT advantages:
(1)They can operate with just about any type of chemically and thermally stable combustible fluid with a sufficient energy density having consistent and reliable combustion properties.
and
(2) They are not hampered by the well-known significant inefficiencies introduced by exhaust emissions systems such as mufflers, catalytic converters, EGR systems, etc..

NOTE: Modern Jet fuels are hydrocarbon BLENDS. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_fuel
These blends are created as cheaply as possible to meet specific fuel properties and standards, including their energy content, and intended use: http://www.csgnetwork.com/jetfuel.html
There have been many well-intentioned pushes for "replacement" Jet fuels, including a "safer" version which was intended to reduce fire balls when Jets crashed, but it was a flop as it introduced safety concerns as the 'safety' additive increased the possibility of a flame-out (it basically made the flash point of the fuel higher and reduced the flammability of jet fuel mist) and it cost way too much for little if any margin of safety it would have introduced. (Most people in jet crashes do not die from a fireball of jet fuel, but from actually hitting the mountain, crashing into the ground/ocean, or basically some form of 'Aortic Dissection' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aortic_dissection )

I say that this is really a SPIN and a PR campaign.

Everyone looks good waving the environmental flag, but when compared to boats, trains, and trucking, jets are NEVER environmentally friendly. (Jets have to fight gravity continuously when moving goods and people = INEFFICIENT)
TFA ( http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S18/96/92S56/index.xml ) is a Press Release about research into processing "Biomass" into Jet fuel And, oh ya BYW, COAL!! THAT'S RIGHT, COAL!
We are talking about fuel from "other than" OIL Sources = SYNTHETIC FUEL (AKA SynFuel), specifically SYNTHETIC "JET" FUEL. http://www.syntroleum.com/pr_individualpressrelease.aspx?NewsID=907157

This really has EVERYTHING to do with the price of oil being SKY HIGH (pun intended): http://www.peak-oil-news.info/new-synthetic-jet-fuel/
Everyone knows that Aviation drinks fuel of any kind faster than other transportation types (when you realize the efficiency ratio of Distance traveled with quantity of cargo compared to actual fuel used per unit cargo (person, metric ton, etc..) for that given distance)
We are talking about stirring up money to get more research into the conversion of Coal into Synthetic Jet fuel (and other fuels) and we'll get to work with biomass too.
Oil is so expensive these days it is becoming just as cheap to chemically engineer/create (from scratch!) synthetic Jet Fuels from Coal. (which the US still has hundreds of years worth)
Why expensively pump it out of the deep ocean, or the middle east, and then transport around the planet (BYW, they use ships for this because of their efficiency, not jet aircraft) when you can just dig up some local Coal or Bitumen Tar Sand deposit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tar_sands and make your own synthetic fuel.
(Now observe the pollutants released and the energy required during the "upgrading" of Coal/Bitumen into the new Synthetic Jet Fuel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upgrader )
FYI: The Germans made Synthetic Jet Fuel during WWII because they had Coal but not so much oil...

Imagine you could contain the pure water from a fully melted iceberg inside a sphere. In the same way an iceberg floats and sticks out of the sea, the ball of pure water would float in the sea with 2.5% of its volume sticking out above the sea surface. If you let the water out of the sphere, the 2.5% volume of pure water that was above the sea level inside the sphere will spread out across the planet's oceans, raising the global sea level.

The iceberg mentioned in the article was 40metres thick and 66 square kilometres in area, so the ice volume is 2.6 billion cubic metres. Ice is 8.3% less dense than pure water liquid , so when the iceberg melts, the volume of pure water will be 2.4 billion cubic metres and 2.5% of that is 60 million cubic metres. The world has 360 million square kilometers of ocean, so adding 60 million cubic metres of pure water will raise average global sea level by 0.17 microns (thousandths of a millimetre)!

I find that highly unlikely. Actually I find it impossible. You couldn't even stop that fast without even taking reaction time into account (more like 50-60m w/o reaction time). During just an exceptional half second reaction time you'll have traveled over 13 meters. Before you even hit the brakes.

Didn't swatch introduce something like that "for people who communicate over the internet" in the '90s?

Maybe they were too early and now there might be a new audience for that idea?

(just found a link explaining swatch internet time and what is swatch internet time)

Most anyone (here (I'd hope)) can build a working galvanic vestibulator in their home for under $5. It's just a 0.1hz~70hz squarewave sinking ~20 milliamps of current through your neck. You can easily do that with a 555 in astable mode (R1=2kOhm,R2=26kOhm,C=.1uF--it'll have a frequency of about 27hz and a duty cycle near %50), a 9v battery or two, some pennies, cotton, and a bit of saltwater. Place the ghetto electrodes beind your ears. Play with the frequency in the above range by using knob potentiometers. I've found ~15-30hz to be best.

Even more fun can be had with a cheap Atmel ATtiny2313 8bit microcontroller (or PIC if you're that type). They cost about ~$2 each but you can sample them from large manufacturers for free (I've sampled 9 ATtiny2313 for free now). They can be programmed right from the serial port in simple (you can ignore the LEDs, but hey leave them in and you have a persistance of vision toy too), or slightly less simple manners.

If you just want to test the effect out then just the 9vs, a few pennies, some cotton, salt water, and a little wire will do. Simply series the batteries and make electrodes out of the materials previously mentioned, warm water works best. Apply the electrodes to your mastoid proccesses and you'll feel the 'acceleration'...and a bit of stinging, but not too bad. (It'd be best if you had a soldering iron, but you could go without if really needed.)

When desiding between buying a 17" flat screan and a 17" CRT the cost of electrisity makes the CRT significantly cheeper over 4 years.

Look at http://www.csgnetwork.com/elecenergycalcs.html to get a good idea just how much your going to spend on energy.

Morse Code Geeks had a hundred year head start on the PC geek...

We're not worthy...We're not worthy...We're not worthy

Convert text to Morse code here:

http://www.csgnetwork.com/morsecodedeconv.html

it seems that while SMS is shorter:
hey gf u can txt ur best pals 2 tel them wot u r doing, where ur going and wot u r wearing
SMS-TAP:443399#4333#222266#8998#88777#7223377778#2 #833555#844336#96668#88#777#3666444664#11#94433777 33#88777#4666444664#2663#96668#88#777#933277744466 41

Compared to:

Hey, girlfriend, you can text all your best pals to tell them where you are going and what you are wearing. (translate that there - lameness filter ;)

Morsecode is simply much more simpler to enter - only 3 different possible entrypoints opposed to 10-11 for SMS...

JP-4 is designed for colder weather, and has a flash point of -40F. Gasoline has a very low flash point, so it would be suitable to add for the purpose of reducing the resultant flash point. Here is a link to a decent summary of jet fuel types: www.goatse.cx

Since you brought it up, I looked it up. here's a link http://www.csgnetwork.com/jetfuel.html

It is a Kerosene derivative, but it also has some other things in it as well. Even pure kerosene isn't something you want on your skin or that you want unwittingly dumped on the ground.

We're talking about cordless, not cellular. You furriners need to read for comprehension.

Some GSM cell phones run on the 900MHz band (880-960MHz).

Some US cordless phones run on the 902-928MHz band. But thanks for your insightful comment anyhow, AC.

Doing a few calculations:

A golf ball must have a diameter of not less than 1.680 inches (42.67mm)

or a volume of 40.679 cm^3.

Feeding that into Calculation of Density with Halfnium, gives a mass of 0.54143749 kg for a golf-ball sized chunk of Halfnium (neglecting the particular isotope in question).

Assuming metric tons for simplicity, a yield of:

10 tons / 0.54143749 kg

Is equivalent to:

18.5 tons / kg

Compare that with existing nuclear weapons. Once you scale the weapon above a certain size, and using optimal designs, you can obtain much higher yield efficiencies, or Yield-to-Weight Ratio's.

"The W-54 Davy Crockett warhead ... was the lightest ever deployed by the US, with a minimum mass of about 23 kg (it also came in heavier packages) and had yields ranging from 10 tons up to 1 Kt in various versions."

Yield-to-Weight Ratios of US Mk-53 Nuclear Weapon
2.25 kt/kg

Or

2,250,000 tons / kg

Which is a MUCH higher efficiency weapon - at least in the energy sense.

if all the wires in the CPU are treated like transmission lines and properly terminated

Considering the size and density of a CPU and 2.4Ghz having a wavelength of 125mm, do you really think wavelengths are a design factor?

Well, if the shady spot is moving, put the connect somewhere halfway in between.

BTW - we are talking serial comms here, not ethernet. According to this FAQ:

The RS-232 specification defines the the maximum length of serial cable to be 75 feet at 9,600 bps. This is a pretty conservative figure and has been stretched as far as several thousand feet, especially at this baud rate.

Even if we were talking 10BaseT or 100BaseT here, you still have 100 meters as spec, and I am certain that is conservative as well - but that is over 300 feet!

As far as the garage is concerned, it should be possible to reach it in some manner - but given the situation, I would forego the access - it just doesn't sound worth it. Still, it could be done - it wouldn't be easy, and you might need to get help from neighbors (to string the cable on the outside of the building) - but it could be done (the hard part would be getting the building owner or landlord, depending on the situation, to allow you to do it, or to sneak it past them).

Your point about the ethernet outlet is taken - but that is why every self respecting geek brings along a battery powered hub before jacking in.

Worldcom - Generation Duh!

I must admit, I didn't know exactly what TNEF was, and I got the impression that a few other people who were posting didn't either.

This is what I found at CSGNetwork's Online Computer, Telephony & Electronics Reference

Pronounced tee-neff, and short for Transport Neutral Encapsulation
Format, a proprietary format used by the Microsoft Exchange and
Outlook E-Mail clients when sending messages formatted as Rich Text
Format (RTF). When Microsoft Exchange thinks that it is sending a
message to another Microsoft E-Mail client, it extracts all the
formatting information and encodes it in a special TNEF block. It then
sends the message in two parts - the text message with the formatting
removed and the formatting instructions in the TNEF block. On the
receiving side, a Microsoft e-mail client processes the TNEF block and
re-formats the message. Unfortunately, most non-Microsoft E-Mail
clients cannot decipher TNEF blocks. Consequently, when you receive a
TNEF-encoded message with a non-Microsoft e-mail client, the TNEF part
appears as a long sequence of hexadecimal digits, either in the
message itself or as an attached file (usually named
WINMAIL.DAT). These WINMAIL.DAT files serve no useful purpose so you
can delete them.

So it's not UNICODE or something like it, it's extra formatting information that, unfortunately, is proprietary.