Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New Zealand Creates Safety Billboard That Bleeds When It Rains

Posted by samzenpus on from the when-it-rains-it-gores dept.

Officials in Papakura, New Zealand have come up with a billboard that bleeds when it rains. They hope it will encourage drivers to slow down when the weather makes conditions dangerous. Since the billboards have been erected, there hasn't been a fatal accident in the area.

137 comments

  1. Supernaturally effective by Bovius · · Score: 4, Funny

    The power of advertising compels you! To drive safely!

  2. In the U.S. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...we ought to erect a similar billboard that shits when politicians do ANYTHING.

    1. Re:In the U.S. by tuxedobob · · Score: 3, Funny

      You're just trying to get goatse posted on a billboard in your community, aren't you?

    2. Re:In the U.S. by xednieht · · Score: 1

      Awesome, simply awesome +12

      --

      Hope is the currency of fools
    3. Re:In the U.S. by Landshark17 · · Score: 2, Funny

      No good - it'd pile up so fast you'd need wings to stay above it.

      --
      This sig is false.
    4. Re:In the U.S. by Landshark17 · · Score: 2, Funny

      My bad, misread your post as "shits anytime politicians bullshit."

      --
      This sig is false.
    5. Re:In the U.S. by msantosn · · Score: 0
      Or in Mexico...

      ...we ought to erect a similar billboard that shits when politicians do A THING.

      =)

    6. Re:In the U.S. by DinDaddy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Can you please explain the difference?

  3. Wow! Excellent advertising. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 1

    We need that ad here.

    1. Re:Wow! Excellent advertising. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With our luck, here in the US the technology will instead be used to advertise feminine products....

    2. Re:Wow! Excellent advertising. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't wait until someone blames their crash on "That nasty billboard I was staring at."

  4. How soon before... by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 4, Funny

    someone sees Jesus in one of the billboards?

    --
    I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    1. Re:How soon before... by BabyDuckHat · · Score: 1

      Actually, Michael Jackson sightings are the new thing.

  5. Zero of nothing by Shihar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since the billboards have been erected, there hasn't been a fatal accident in the area.

    Of course, being New Zealand, since the billboard was erected there have not been any cars there either.

    1. Re:Zero of nothing by kreyszig · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, anyone wanting to go south of Auckland pretty much has to go through Papakura, so this is quite some achievment.

    2. Re:Zero of nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Except during the same time frame last year that area had 14 deaths from car accidents.

    3. Re:Zero of nothing by oodaloop · · Score: 0

      It's also quite effective at repelling elephants, as no elephants have been sighted in the vicinity since it was put up.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    4. Re:Zero of nothing by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      Thats really a small number though that could depend on multiple variables. How do we know that the same amount of cars passed through it? For all we know there could have been a road that was under construction that people use now. Also did the road get any more improvements? What about weather? There would be a big difference if last year there were lots of storms. Etc. Plus, for all we know, most of those 14 deaths could have happened with one or two cars. Its really too small of an amount of deaths to say with any certainty if they are working.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    5. Re:Zero of nothing by gnick · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Thats really a small number though that could depend on multiple variables. How do we know that the same amount of cars passed through it? For all we know there could have been a road that was under construction that people use now. Also did the road get any more improvements? What about weather? There would be a big difference if last year there were lots of storms. Etc.

      "Small" is entirely relative. Granted that road improvements, construction, weather, etc. could have affected numbers. (Freakish weather is less "variable" than the presence of bleeding billboards.) You are correct that there aren't enough data to do a thorough statistical analysis, but you seem to be grasping at straws. From 14 to 0 could be very statistically significant depending on the standard deviation from year-to-year and the elimination of outside influence. Just because 14 is "small" compared to your local Interstate exit doesn't mean that it's negligible for this stretch of NZ highway.

      "TFA" is worthless, but speculating on potential spikes in common, relatively flat variables should not eliminate the speculation on effects of observable variation in very prominent and very uncommon variables. Put more simply, and in a car analogy, if you install a set of used tires and 2 blow out during your normal commute home, look first at your tires and then at potential anomalies in the road.

      Plus, for all we know, most of those 14 deaths could have happened with one or two cars.

      OK, if you're in NZ (or really pretty much anywhere but India) 14 people in "one or two" cars would be a lot. 14 people in my car (or most any car) would require opening the sun-roof and me meeting a bunch of midgets. If you're going to pedant statistics, refrain from speculating on obvious outliers. 14 deaths in a 1-car wreck on a NZ highway? *Scoff*

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    6. Re:Zero of nothing by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      For rare occurrences, a good estimate of the standard deviation is sqrt(n) -- so, roughly +/- 4 deaths.

    7. Re:Zero of nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, being ignorant, you wouldn't know that the car ownership rate in New Zealand is the third highest in the world. http://www.economist.com/daily/chartgallery/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12714391&fsrc=rss

    8. Re:Zero of nothing by Eevee · · Score: 1

      OK, if you're in NZ (or really pretty much anywhere but India) 14 people in "one or two" cars would be a lot.

      Um, the statement was most of those 14 deaths. That means two cars with four people would meet the original requirement. Depending on how picky you are about "most", one mini-van (counts as a car in the US) with seven people would work--while two mini-vans would result in the total number of deaths.

      (Or, since it's NZ, it could be a truck with one driver and thirteen sheep...)

    9. Re:Zero of nothing by tuxedobob · · Score: 1

      According to Wikipedia, the region in question has about 48,300 people and is about 48 square miles. It's not clear what they mean by Easter Period, but I'd guess either Lent or Easter weekend. Especially if it's Easter weekend, a drop from 14 to 0 deaths over 3 days in an area the size of about 1.5 Massachusetts towns sounds rather significant.

      I know that "correlation is not causation" is a popular mantra, both here and on fark (heh), but correlation implies the existence of one of two things: either causation (either directly or indirectly, from some underlying cause) or coincidence. Given the numbers, I'm disinclined to believe the latter in this case.

    10. Re:Zero of nothing by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      ...But still, 14 deaths could be easily caused by one or two accidents. For example, a bus or van could have collided with a truck easily giving you 8 deaths or more. Now this may or may not be the case, but 14 of anything is too low to really say anything definite.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    11. Re:Zero of nothing by dotgain · · Score: 1

      Mod parent informative. South Auckland is New Zealand's Johannesburg. Being fatally wounded in a car crash would be somewhat a relief.

    12. Re:Zero of nothing by tuxedobob · · Score: 1

      I couldn't find a document for 2008, but according to the first link on this page of the Ministry of Transport's site, in 2007 there were a total of 0 bus drivers and 1 bus passenger killed in all crashes through the year, out of a total of 422 vehicle-related deaths (Table 7). These numbers are 0 and 0 in both 2006 and 2005, as well. Furthermore, a Google search for "2008 new zealand bus accident" doesn't appear to turn up any accidents with a death count of 14 or lower, and the only two bus crashes in NZ for the year (from the search results list) appear to have been in February and December.

      In short, I think it's safe to rule out a bus as the cause of 14 deaths.

    13. Re:Zero of nothing by dotgain · · Score: 1

      "TFA" is worthless, but speculating on potential spikes in common, relatively flat variables should not eliminate the speculation on effects of observable variation in very prominent and very uncommon variables. Put more simply, and in a car analogy, if you install a set of used tires and 2 blow out during your normal commute home, look first at your tires and then at potential anomalies in the road.

      Four about five years now, "Healthnsafety" has been an entire industry in New Zealand. It's not helping us in this time of recession that some of the highest paid people are doing nothing toward actual production but instead holding regular meetings about things like how often the fire exit signs need to be cleaned and so on. Local councils have handfuls of people deciding what ever to do next, all in the name of safety. The newspapers love to report how many road fatalities we didn't have in a given month, as if that's some useful statistic.

      On the whole, we seem brainwashed enough as a nation that it doesn't look like it's going anywhere. Most of the people I speak to genuinely believe things like judder bars, huge reflective signs you need to dip for at night, $40,000 solar powered signs reminding us to wear our seatbelts all make us safer and are worth it. Time and time again solar panels get ripped off (you know, the really expensive things) and rather than fire some stupid twit on the council for having such a crazy idea in the first place, the thefts are denounced as putting "lives at risk". I give up, I swear in 20 years all this country will be good at is holding health and safety meetings and nothing else.

    14. Re:Zero of nothing by gnick · · Score: 1

      You sound like a safety-skeptic. But, as long as one life is saved, isn't it all worth it?

      Oh wait... If for the same price you could have saved 2 lives doing something more senisble I guess not... Or if the life you saved was some numb-skull who'll just waste himself a week later doing something else equally as stupid... Or if it was just a virtual life that never wouldn't have been spent regardless of your actions...

      Damn I hate the phrase "as long as one life is saved"... It's almost as bad as "Won't someone think of the children". When I get home I'm tearing the label off of my kid's mattress reminding me not to set it on fire.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    15. Re:Zero of nothing by dotgain · · Score: 1
      Exactly. No, as long as one life was saved it is almost never worth it. People kill themselves, they don't inadvertently meet powerpoles due to a lack of billboards telling them not to. You'll never be able to say whether 'investing' in a road safety campaign saves any lives or not, but when the majority of them seem far more distracting anyway it's not unreasonable to say that some of them will have had the opposite effect (I refer to my post earlier in this thread explaining no less than 12 pictorial signs only a couple of metres apart).

      Safety Skeptic? Far from it - I believe in safety, that's why I tell my machine operators and forklift drivers that I'll fire them if I see them listening to music players under their earmuffs. I put people on notice for leaving shit in walkways. But I don't feel sorry for people who suffer purely from their own stupidity and don't believe there's much you can do to stop that happening. Years ago, one of our guys broke a leg under an 800 kilogram roll of paper - he hadn't mounted it with the hydraulic crane completely, and thought he could finish off the job by kicking it on. Tucked inside his "get well soon" card was a "you're fired you stupid prick, every one of us is ashamed of you and your cost to our production will be borne by us all" card.

      You might say I believe in a kind of Darwinism.

    16. Re:Zero of nothing by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      I would even sugest the 14 fatailities in a single incident (regardless of the number of vehicles) would be extremely unlikely given the mortaility rate in a multi-vehicle accident is rarely 100%. Chances are an accident of that scale would have been visible in the world media as some outrageous freak event.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    17. Re:Zero of nothing by Petrushka · · Score: 1

      Except during the same time frame last year that area had 14 deaths from car accidents.

      I sure hope you have a source for this, given that the time frame stated at the end of the clip is the Easter weekend, and in the 2008 Easter weekend there were in fact eight deaths from car accidents in the whole of New Zealand.

    18. Re:Zero of nothing by Petrushka · · Score: 1

      It's not clear what they mean by Easter Period, but I'd guess either Lent or Easter weekend. Especially if it's Easter weekend, a drop from 14 to 0 deaths over 3 days in an area the size of about 1.5 Massachusetts towns

      They mean the Easter weekend, which is traditionally the most lethal time of the year on NZ roads. The Easter road toll is counted from 4 pm on the Thursday to 6 am on the Tuesday (the Monday after Easter is a public holiday).

      However, as I've also pointed out in another post on this page, there is no way in hell that that or any other district in NZ had a road toll of 14 in the Easter weekend of 2008, as the road toll for the entire country that year was 8 (or 9; I've now found one report that gives 9, but I can't find anything to corroborate it. In 2009, according to the same report, the nation-wide Easter road toll was 6).

    19. Re:Zero of nothing by RedWizzard · · Score: 1

      Thats really a small number though that could depend on multiple variables. How do we know that the same amount of cars passed through it? For all we know there could have been a road that was under construction that people use now. Also did the road get any more improvements? What about weather? There would be a big difference if last year there were lots of storms. Etc. Plus, for all we know, most of those 14 deaths could have happened with one or two cars. Its really too small of an amount of deaths to say with any certainty if they are working.

      The 14 figure stated by the AC is wrong. The period that they are talking about was over Easter - 4.5 days approximately. According to this the Easter road toll for 2008 was 9 nationally so I have no idea where the 14 came from.

    20. Re:Zero of nothing by fractoid · · Score: 1

      Oh wait... If for the same price you could have saved 2 lives doing something more senisble I guess not...

      What's even more insidious are things which maybe save a few lives, but inconvenience millions of other people. Speed limits are a prime example; even if the reasoning was sound (it's not - they jump from "X% of road deaths were speed related" to "thus we could save Y lives if we drop the state speed limit by 10km/h" without acknowledging that if the cops list a road death as "speed related" they weren't following the bloody speed limit anyway), the extra time, fuel and wear-and-tear that it costs everyone else to sit in traffic adds up to more than the savings.

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    21. Re:Zero of nothing by fractoid · · Score: 1

      Lisa, I want to buy your rock!

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    22. Re:Zero of nothing by Shihar · · Score: 1

      And if I dumped a car on an uninhabited island that island would have a car ownership rate of infinity (/0)!!! I bet they would have accidents all the time there!

    23. Re:Zero of nothing by Mozk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      aren't enough data

      Knock it off. Just use "data" as a singular noun like everybody else.

      --
      No existe.
    24. Re:Zero of nothing by endymion.nz · · Score: 1

      14 less in this area is statistically significant because only ~ 350 people died on the roads in the whole NZ last year.

      --
      mediocrity rules, man
    25. Re:Zero of nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, anyone wanting to go south of Auckland pretty much has to go through Papakura, so this is quite some achievment.

      Actually, there is a scenic round around the coast of the Hauraki Gulf that avoids Papakura altogether. For destinations in the Coromandel Peninsula it's basically the same distance as the Pakapura route (but on far worse roads).

  6. I'd be too busy by Theoboley · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Staring at the billboard/horror show to concentrate on driving, thus causing an accident. /fail

    --
    Stupidity only gets you so far, then you've gotta try
  7. Troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm pretty sure you could also get a bunch of Christians to worship a picture of Jesus with this sorta tech.

  8. I could be wrong here... by thewils · · Score: 2, Funny

    but I don't think it's really blood. Seems to be some kind of red liquid to simulate blood, I think.

    "Leaking" might be a better word to describe it, I wouldn't use "bleeding" myself.

    --
    Once I was a four stone apology. Now I am two separate gorillas.
    1. Re:I could be wrong here... by somersault · · Score: 1

      You can use bleeding for mechanical/hydraulic systems too. And if it's looks like blood dripping across someone's face, bleeding seems a decent enough use of the word.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    2. Re:I could be wrong here... by atomic-penguin · · Score: 1

      but I don't think it's really blood. Seems to be some kind of red liquid to simulate blood, I think.

      Nah, you don't think!

      Mod parent +1 Insightful.

      --
      /^([Ss]ame [Bb]at (time, |channel.)){2}$/
    3. Re:I could be wrong here... by JCZwart · · Score: 1

      A risky assumption. New Zealanders might be witnessing the shed blood of thousands. Snuff in it's purest form! And you're all "Oh, this would probably just be lemonade!"

    4. Re:I could be wrong here... by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 1

      Seems to be some kind of red liquid

      It's probably rainwater collected at the top/back of the billboard and run through a dyed filter.

    5. Re:I could be wrong here... by oldspewey · · Score: 4, Funny

      but I don't think it's really blood.

      In related news, the New Zealand Health Bureau has stepped up calls for donors in the midst of what is being called "the greatest blood shortage crisis our nation has ever known."

      --
      If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    6. Re:I could be wrong here... by thewils · · Score: 1

      If fluid came out of my brake lines in raging torrents like it seems to do on the billboards I personally wouldn't call it "bleeding".

      --
      Once I was a four stone apology. Now I am two separate gorillas.
    7. Re:I could be wrong here... by somersault · · Score: 1

      I'd probably go with "pissing".

      --
      which is totally what she said
  9. How Long? by sycodon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Until someone crashes while gawking at the bleeding billboards?

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    1. Re:How Long? by Anonymous+Struct · · Score: 1

      Yeah.. it's like how nothing makes people pay more attention to the road than a flaming jack-knifed semi in the median. See, it reminds them what happens when you don't drive safely.

    2. Re:How Long? by Bigby · · Score: 1

      Is slowing down to 5 mph to look at that semi considered safe these days?

    3. Re:How Long? by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      No, they aren't slowing down because they're reminded what happens in an accident, they're slowing down to see destruction and maybe some bodies. Just like people will gather around a burning building to watch it burn down.

      If they REALLY were feeling that they need to drive safer, they wouldn't be looking to the SIDE instead of the car IN FRONT of them.

    4. Re:How Long? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in Dayton, OH, and there was a Buffy the Vampire Slayer billboard just south of downtown with a huge picture of Sarah Michelle Gellar. There were quite a lot of wrecks at the time it was up. Since it's been gone (a few years), the accident frequency has dropped considerably. Coincidence?

    5. Re:How Long? by serbanp · · Score: 1

      A similar thing happened in the nineties in the LA area where a huge inflatable depicting a semi-nude Kim Basinger was raised next to the highway...

    6. Re:How Long? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Near me is a highway with an S-bend that dips under a railway bridge. Several years ago, someone put a women's underwear ad on one of the billboards facing traffic, with a short skirt over the picture which would blow up in the wind to reveal the underwear.
      They were made to take it down after the accident rate on that bend went from a couple a year to a couple a week.

    7. Re:How Long? by RedWizzard · · Score: 1

      Until someone crashes while gawking at the bleeding billboards?

      Almost happened the other day: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sideswipe/news/article.cfm?c_id=702&objectid=10583035 (last paragraph in column).

  10. ...No deaths, except for those ones... by RyanFenton · · Score: 2, Funny

    Not reported are those deaths caused by folks either watching or cringing away from the image of a giant boy bleeding out his nostrils and eyebrows. ...followed by a sign that said...burma shave.

    Ryan Fenton

    1. Re:...No deaths, except for those ones... by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Burma Shave? Is that Myanmar's answer to a certain grooming fashion in south america?

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  11. with a few more tweaks by circletimessquare · · Score: 3, Funny

    they also got the billboard to shit bats

    making it the most goth/ emo billboard in the world

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  12. Awesome much? by S7urm · · Score: 2, Funny

    I think that is a pretty cool idea, what better way to get your average 16 year old chucklehead to pay attention and not drive head on into my mom on the road, then to remind him that getting in accidents cause signs to bleed at random in New Zealand...........and also forces people to kill cute puppies and kittens.........

    Damn kids! get off my lawn!

    --
    "This is the value of a summer spent and a winter earned"
    1. Re:Awesome much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, but I'm not one to look at things like orgish.___ and kill kittens.

  13. But when was it errected? by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 1

    I just flipped someone off while passing them on my way to work. Since then No radio stations have reported any new accidents.

    ROAD RAGE WORKS!

    (but not really, I wouldn't do that)

  14. eh? by poetmatt · · Score: 2, Funny

    Did they really realize that they basically made a menstruating billboard? At least it doesn't yell at people or have emotional breakdowns.

    1. Re:eh? by bsane · · Score: 1

      Thats version 2 of this sign...

    2. Re:eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, but out of the women's eyeballs?

      They gotta be carrying some tight, tight tampons in those NZ grocery stores. No wonder all the accidents.

  15. thats a nice sign look by naeone · · Score: 1

    thats a nice sign loOKOUT FOR THAT TRUCK , road side advertising never distracted anyone !

  16. Missleading by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

    unless you know the accident rate and have enough data points over time, you can't tell if the billboard works. It may simply not been in place long enough for it to work. Even if yo see a reduction in accidents over time - was it the novelty of a bleedboard or did simply having something new in place cause people to slow down? Once they get used to it, accidents may revert to their old level.

    --
    I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
  17. Re:Misleading by Bovius · · Score: 1

    You mean once they get used to the visage of a child with blood pouring out of their face?

  18. If you want to get people to slow down in the rain by gurps_npc · · Score: 5, Funny

    Put an electronic headline news billboard up. Then when it rains, put a fake headline like "Be on the look out for a nude 20 year old girl on Highway 3" I assure you, all the men will slow down and be on the look out for her.

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
  19. Bloody New Zealand Brilliance by itsybitsy · · Score: 1

    Wow, bloody roads in New Zealand indeed! Maybe they've been watching too much Lord of the Rings, one bloody set of films...

    Don't think of a pink ELEPHANT with bloody eyes. Oh, wait you just did think of it!

    Don't think of crashing your car while driving seeing bloody eyes on highway sigh... oh wait you just did... smack...

    Driving safe ads need to be carefully crafted so that you don't see a spike in accidents.

  20. Rubbernecking? by orkybash · · Score: 1

    I'm surprised the billboard hasn't *caused* accidents as people take their eyes off the road to stare at the bleeding billboard and try to puzzle out what's going on. That's at least what I would have expected...

  21. Re:If you want to get people to slow down in the r by GerardAtJob · · Score: 1

    You missed the point here... the problem is female drivers!
    We should put a baby face on the back of each car instead... this way they'll look the car in front of them, brake when needed (They doesn't want to hurt the baby face in front of them) and accelerate when the car in front of them accelerate.
    All will goes right... (assuming the first car is driven by a man)
    Problem solved... NEXT ;)

    --
    I can't call that English ;-)
  22. Al Gore's hyperbole knows no bounds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6658672.ece

    Gee, these sound like the words of a reasonable man that we should all obey...

    1. Re:Al Gore's hyperbole knows no bounds by dotgain · · Score: 2, Interesting
      About a year ago in Matakana, NZ they erected a series of signs, no less than 12 of them, all only a couple of metres apart. The series of pictures was meant to represent one's life flashing before one's eyes, but had two unintended (but obvious side effects):
      1. It took people's eyes off the road for a good few seconds to try and figure out what all the signs were
      2. Due to the sheer number of posts being driven into the ground without planning or consent, communications fiber in the ground didn't stand a chance.

      The boards were all ordered down a couple of weeks later, but hey, at least we were all a little be safer for the time! Seriously, all road safety awareness in NZ is this pathetic.

    2. Re:Al Gore's hyperbole knows no bounds by master5o1 · · Score: 1

      Some ideas are worse than others. Any road advert that takes one's eyes from the road for more than two seconds is poorly designed -- especially if it is to convey road safety.

      --
      signature is pants
  23. The appropriate name for this new material? by dmomo · · Score: 2, Funny

    Gore-Techs

    1. Re:The appropriate name for this new material? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I heard the maintanence technicians responsible call themselves Guro-Techs.

  24. Rain isn't causing those accidents by redshirt · · Score: 5, Funny

    After watching the video, the real cause of accidents is clear: they drive on the wrong side of the road!

    1. Re:Rain isn't causing those accidents by GreatDrok · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "After watching the video, the real cause of accidents is clear: they drive on the wrong side of the road!"

      Amusing although more than half (66%) of the world's population actually does drive on the left but that is besides the point.

      NZ has a real problem with bad drivers. People don't have any clue about stopping distances so tailgating is rampant so the number of related accidents is very high. The road surfaces aren't very good, cars aren't kept in good condition as the Warrant Of Fitness is cursory at best compared with say the MOT in the UK. I was appalled when I first moved here to find that the tyres on my recently bought car were OK as far as the WOF was concerned because they had tread on 80% of the surface (bald around the edges due to misaligned tracking) and passed just fine. The car would slide and aquaplane in the rain so I replaced the whole lot.

      Basically, bad road awareness and poorly maintained cars is the main problem. Oh, and no insurance is required, not even third party so if someone crashes into you and they are uninsured you are stuffed. I bought fully comp insurance because of this.

      The only real blessing is that the speed limit is so low (100 kph or 62 MPH max even on the few stretches of motorway) but even so, NZ drivers are scary!

      --
      "I have the attention span of a strobe lit goldfish, please get to the point quickly!"
    2. Re:Rain isn't causing those accidents by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Amusing although more than half (66%) of the world's population actually does drive on the left but that is besides the point.

      Population of people, or of cars?

      No fair counting India where the number of people greatly exceeds the number of cars -- vehicles per capita is 12 out of 1000 versus the US where it is 765 per 1000.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    3. Re:Rain isn't causing those accidents by F�an�ro · · Score: 3, Funny

      And if you count India, you should count it for both sides.
      I am not sure how to tell which side they prefer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjrEQaG5jPM

    4. Re:Rain isn't causing those accidents by GreatDrok · · Score: 1

      Doesn't matter, early morning syndrome struck and the figure is 44% drive on the left, 66% on the right. My bad. 72% of the world's roads are for left hand drive cars.

      --
      "I have the attention span of a strobe lit goldfish, please get to the point quickly!"
    5. Re:Rain isn't causing those accidents by GreatDrok · · Score: 1

      Dammit! Wake up! 66% on right, 34% on left. Still a significant portion and unlikely to change in the case of the UK due to the expense of rebuilding junctions.

      --
      "I have the attention span of a strobe lit goldfish, please get to the point quickly!"
    6. Re:Rain isn't causing those accidents by EkriirkE · · Score: 1
      Just copy-pasta the arcicle already.

      today about 66% of the world's people live in right-hand traffic countries and 34% in left-hand traffic countries. About 72% of the world's total road distance carries traffic on the right, and 28% on the left.

      --
      from 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
      to 45 2F 6E 40 3C DF 10 71 4E 41 DF AA 25 7D 31 3F
    7. Re:Rain isn't causing those accidents by Petrushka · · Score: 1

      We'll make sure to switch over when they finally build the bridge to ... wherever the nearest country is that drives on the other side of the road.

      Hmm ... I guess that would be New Caledonia. ... about 1400 km away.

      (But to switch sides there they'll have to switch sides in mainland France as well. That will be our foothold in Europe. Hahahahaha! Soon all of continental Europe will be driving on the left! With blackjack! and hookers!)

    8. Re:Rain isn't causing those accidents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot to mention that NZ has a very young licensing age, 15 for a learners license. Full license by 17 or 18. And that the NZ driving test is ridiculously simple. We also have a serious problem with drink drivers.

    9. Re:Rain isn't causing those accidents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed that there are a lot of bad drivers in NZ - impatient drivers in particular. Not sure what the cause is to be quite honest. I suspect it could be improved a great deal if during driver training there were accident scenarios presented to the new driver. Nothing like actually being involved in an accident (in a safe way, ofcourse) to realize the potential for harm. The roads in my experience, however, are maintained reasonably well on the whole - at least on par with any other country I've driven in. Similar things can be said about car maintenance - certainly no worse than elsewhere, excluding the obvious places which are 20 years or more behind the rest of the country (such as Northland or the east coast), where these things are more care-free (as they should be to be quite honest - I suspect accident rates are no different there). The WOF testing has improved a great deal recently, which I think is partly useful, and partly a money grab. Some of the stuff they test for is completely stupid and does nothing for safety on the road (or very little). Things such as requiring a plastic shell on a safety belt (which contributes nothing to the safety of said belt, but is purely cosmetic - ah the early 90s) to have no cracks in it, for instance.

    10. Re:Rain isn't causing those accidents by RedWizzard · · Score: 1

      I was appalled when I first moved here to find that the tyres on my recently bought car were OK as far as the WOF was concerned because they had tread on 80% of the surface (bald around the edges due to misaligned tracking) and passed just fine. The car would slide and aquaplane in the rain so I replaced the whole lot.

      Did that happen recently? My car failed it's WOF a couple of months ago for exactly this issue (and it wasn't so bad as to cause any loss of grip in any conditions I'd driven in).

    11. Re:Rain isn't causing those accidents by neoprint · · Score: 1

      I AM a New Zealand driver you insensitive clod! But I do agree with you. I've grown up here, and indicators are optional, people follow about 4 nanometres from your bumper, etc. The roads are truely terrible. The camber is all wrong for most corners, and covered in potholes. At least in the South Island.

  25. Re:How soon before... We won't by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    Nor the effigy of Mary.

    Now, it is MORE likely we'll instead first see tampons, condoms and depends raining when it's pouring... For that last one, one could ask, "What does it taste like when a billboard is in the rain?" Another could respond, "Umm, welll, ummmm, it... depends..."... DOH!

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  26. Well gosh darn! by denzacar · · Score: 2, Funny

    We should better let them know then.
    They should immediately start cutting and stabbing actual living things on top of that billboard, or stop calling it "bleeding".

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  27. Lisa Simpson's Tiger-Repellant Rock by nspitze · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    "Lisa, I want to buy your rock..."
    -HOMER

  28. trophygirl09 by Trophy+Girl+09 · · Score: 1

    that's a great idea. also very cool. we need one over here for drunk driving or something to that extent. although, it may be a little distracting too...

    1. Re:trophygirl09 by ManlySpork · · Score: 1

      But it doesn't rain beer....

  29. That won't scare Slashdotters . . . by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

    . . . bleeding billboards? Yawn.

    . . . now if those billboards could project holograms of sharks with lasers and zombies screaming, "Braaaaiins" . . . it might work.

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    1. Re:That won't scare Slashdotters . . . by weeboo0104 · · Score: 1

      How about a billboard with Natalie Portman in hot grits, wearing a t-shirt? ...that gets wet when it rains!

      --
      It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -Frederick Douglass
  30. Correlation != Causation by dublindan · · Score: 0

    That is all.

    1. Re:Correlation != Causation by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      Of course it does. Every time an article even remotely about correlation is posted on slashdot, someone says, "Correlation != Causation". It's like Pavlov ringing a bell.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    2. Re:Correlation != Causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're assuming that the reason people post "Correlation != Causation" is that the article is about correlation.

    3. Re:Correlation != Causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's like Pavlov ringing a bell.

      Why does that name sound so familiar?

    4. Re:Correlation != Causation by tuxedobob · · Score: 1

      I guess we can't prove that articles of that type cause that behavior, but there's a strong correlation.

  31. Re:How soon before... We won't by hedwards · · Score: 1

    Hmm, blood, wet, erected, I can't possibly think of something else that might benefit from the technology for advertising.

  32. Vandalism Magnet by davegravy · · Score: 1

    "Who wants to get drunk, go out and replace the red dye with motor oil??"

  33. Next billboard by hellfire · · Score: 1

    And the very next billboard will be an advertisement asking the question "Constipated?"

    --

    "All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"

  34. Re:How soon before... We won't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    not entirely sure where you're going here ... but that's okay, please don't elaborate

  35. Re:If you want to get people to slow down in the r by Bigby · · Score: 1

    It'll backfire and all men will speed up to get to find her as quickly as possible. If they happen to find a nude woman on the highway, they'll completely stop causing massive traffic issues and accidents.

  36. Correlation is not causation by Tyler+Durden · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why should we accept that the rain causes the billboard to bleed? Perhaps the bleeding of the billboard causes the rain...

    --
    Happy people make bad consumers.
  37. Re:Misleading by plague3106 · · Score: 1

    Ya, why wouldn't one get used to seeing that, if they see it everyday?

  38. You Are. by davegravy · · Score: 3, Funny

    Obviously they collected the blood from past accident victims (who never noticed the fine print on their organ donation card authorizing the use of their blood in accident prevention advertising campaigns)

  39. Better Solution by davegravy · · Score: 1

    This billboard only has an influence on those who have line-of-sight to it. They should just engineer things so that all rain in New Zealand is bloody.

  40. Great spin! by The_mad_linguist · · Score: 1

    I'm impressed. Whoever screwed up and forgot to order indelible dyes for the billboards is going to end up with a promotion instead.

  41. They need this in california .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I picture of the governator crying, when it rains, as california's have no freakin clue how to drive in inclement weather. Now i'm sure it has something to do with 300+ days of clear skies.

  42. I am all for electronic speed limit signs by Shivetya · · Score: 1

    placed at intervals that they cannot be ignored. When speeds reduce the numbers should be in RED. They can be whatever convention is used for other traffic control signals depending on where in the world they are used.

    However, using my area as an example. Normal speeds display in white... suggested speeds in yellow (like they are hinting that a speed reduction is coming) and then finally reduced maximums based on weather or traffic. We already have entrance ramps controlled by lights so why not control the highway as well based on prevailing weather conditions.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:I am all for electronic speed limit signs by dzarn · · Score: 1

      They recently put those in along I-70 just west of Denver, and I have never seen them below 65. Even when thick fog makes it suicide to drive faster than about 30, they stay 65. So they don't do much good unless they actually get updated, which is still a manual process.

  43. Tiger Rock! by Reason58 · · Score: 1

    Homer: Well, there's not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol is sure doing its job.
    Lisa: That's specious reasoning, Dad.
    Homer: Thank you, sweetie.
    Lisa: Dad, what if I were to tell you that this rock keeps away tigers.
    Homer: Uh-huh, and how does it work?
    Lisa: It doesn't work. It's just a stupid rock.
    Homer: I see.
    Lisa: But you don't see any tigers around, do you?
    Homer: Lisa, I'd like to buy your rock.

    1. Re:Tiger Rock! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Homer: Let the bears pay the bear tax, I pay the Homer tax.
      Lisa: No Dad, that's the homeowner tax.

  44. Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Check out this graph for proof: http://giavasan.diludovico.it/archivi/public_html/giavasan/archivi/images4/FeshLemons.gif

  45. Vista Pollution by Fieryphoenix · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's getting impossible to enjoy the scenery there any more because of all the bloody signs!

    1. Re:Vista Pollution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's getting impossible to enjoy the scenery there any more because of all the bloody signs!

      200 years ago New Zealand was covered head to toe in stunningly beautiful, dense rainforest. It has virtually all been cut down now to grow the grass fed beef & lamb & dairy exports NZ is famous for.

      Bloody signs indeed.

  46. Re:Misleading by EkriirkE · · Score: 1

    "Oh, your kid will be fine. Once it stops raining they'll be their old self again!"

    --
    from 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    to 45 2F 6E 40 3C DF 10 71 4E 41 DF AA 25 7D 31 3F
  47. Watch the video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you watch the video it's obvious why there are accidents - they're all driving on the wrong side of the road!

  48. Don't slow down, stay back by markdavis · · Score: 1

    "Slowing down" is not really what is needed in most cases...

    Which do you think is safer or more effective: slowing down 15% or increasing following distance 15%? I am betting following distance is FAR more critical to accident avoidance. Speed is rarely "the" problem, unless there is a great speed differential in the traffic on the road.

    Personally, I always try to leave more distance... and the worse the conditions, the more distance I add. That extra second (or more) can make a big difference.

    1. Re:Don't slow down, stay back by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Which do you think is safer or more effective: slowing down 15% or increasing following distance 15%?

      If you increase your speed 15%, you need to increase your stopping distance by something like 30%.

      Physics FAIL

      Personally, I always try to leave more distance... and the worse the conditions, the more distance I add. That extra second (or more) can make a big difference.

      Very true. Following too close is definitely dumb.

      It's simply true that at lower speeds it's easier to avoid a crash. You just have more time! Also, when one occurs, it is less serious.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Don't slow down, stay back by markdavis · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I thought about it after I posted and realized that speed vs. following distance was probably not directly related. But my point was still generally valid-

      With the proper following distance for your speed, you don't have to reduce speed to maintain reasonable safety.

      The old "2 second rule" might be OK for any speed, but only under "normal" weather and traffic conditions. When conditions deteriorate, you have to make it a 3 or 4 second rule, instead.

    3. Re:Don't slow down, stay back by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The old "2 second rule" might be OK for any speed, but only under "normal" weather and traffic conditions. When conditions deteriorate, you have to make it a 3 or 4 second rule, instead.

      There are considerations other than stopping distance, for example sight distance. In the rain, for example, it's harder to tell what the cars ahead of you are doing. Slow down, so that there is more time between when you realize someone is a dumbfuck, and when your reflexes have kicked in, if your sight distance is reduced. (Which is why I should probably slow down in the canyons...)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  49. Accidents are not accidental. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 1

    I liked what the woman said in the video. Something like, "Accidents are not accidental, they happen because people aren't careful."

    1. Re:Accidents are not accidental. by master5o1 · · Score: 1

      The word 'accident' is a scapegoat term as to assume that there is no one (not even one's self) to blame. An accident is an avoidable incident, avoidable by being a little more careful.

      --
      signature is pants
    2. Re:Accidents are not accidental. by fractoid · · Score: 1

      That's true, but at the same time, nothing in this world is perfect. You have to distinguish between intent, culpability (where there was on intent but reasonable care was not taken, implying negligence), and accidental events, which occur through chance despite all reasonable care being taken. Sure, you could probably eliminate most accidents by increasing safety margins and being more careful, but an efficient system gravitates towards the point where the cost of increasing precautions begins to outweigh the savings from reduced accidents.

      So, in a maximally efficient society, you will always get "shit happens", because the cost of stopping any more of that shit happening is greater than the cost of just letting it happen.

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
  50. It's a feature! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They claim that the bleeding is a feature, when in actuality they just used cheap ink and the local government, like all local governments globally, were too thick to realize.

  51. Wangs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I love any country that makes it illegal to mutilate the genitals of a male infant against his will.

  52. Mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you faggots

  53. This is old technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Catholics have been using this tech for years on those statues in South America...

  54. Profit! by marciot · · Score: 1

    Beware of the kids selling red Kool-Aid by the side of the road on a rainy day...

  55. Wet T-Shirt Version? by BurzumNazgul · · Score: 1

    When is the wet T-Shirt version coming out?

    --
    I can say [REDACTED] anytime I want!