Slashdot Mirror
Automatic Brakes Stopped Berlin Truck During Christmas Market Attack (dw.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Deutsche Welle: The truck that plowed into a Berlin Christmas market, killing 12, came to a halt due an automatic braking system, according to German media reports on Wednesday. The automatic braking system potentially saved the lives of many more people in the recent terrorist attack. An investigation by newspaper "Suddeutsche Zeitung" and broadcasters "NDR" and "WDR" found the Scania R 450 semi-trailer stopped after between 70 and 80 meters (250 feet). The system was reportedly engaged after sensing a collision. Previous reports speculated that the truck had driven erratically and stopped due to the heroic actions of the truck's Polish driver, who lay fatally wounded in the cabin. In 2012 the European Union adopted regulations requiring all new trucks exceeding 3,500 kilograms be fitted with advanced emergency braking systems. The systems initially alert drivers and then take evasive action. The regulation was adopted to reduce the number of rear end collisions by trucks.
Could have stopped. Should have stopped.... Technology is evolving fast.
If this technologically non-savvy terrorist had no idea about automated braking, just think about technologically savvy terrorist who will be able to program automatic trucks to ignore collision by hacking certain sensors. We are talking about automatic road killing robot.
How would you stop such autonomous cargo truck with no driver to shoot at?
i don't see any double edged sword : you can get a vehicle to accelerate without braking with a stone and a bit of tape, and "ignore collision" is the default mode without that system. But the problem would not be to accelerate without a driver, the problem would be to drive at all. You would need to remote control the vehicle, a much harder problem. Even if you used a driver-less car you would need to change the software to bypass all securities. Needless to say, it is much easier terror wise to get a cheap drone, attach 500 kg of remotely detonated plastic, and use that, you got remote control together with a camera built in.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
After you already hit something? What would you win by not hitting the brakes? People rear ending you still have their airbags and seatbelts and crumple zones, which will protect them from the worst. People in front of you don't. So breaking and getting some 40 ton heap of steel into stillstand as soon as possible once it is out of control (and because it hit something, there is enough proof to call it out of control) is in any case better than let it run to save the people driving to close behind it a few bucks by keeping their cars undamaged.
Quran (5:51) - "O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people."
And I'm pretty sure that the Old Testament says that kids who sass their parents should be put to death. Not to mention the large number of "abominations" outside of being gay that are routinely ignored in Leviticus.
You are comparing a book that is routinely ignored with a book that is routinely followed.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
Completely false. Christians account for over 50 million Germans vs 21 million unaffiliated.
http://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/religious-projection-table/
Please quit spreading lies.
So, ... this system reduces the number of rear end collisions by slamming on the breaks after it hits something?
It's probably designed to prevent issues of runaway trucks where the driver is in someway incapacitated (asleep, passed out, heart attack, whatever) or simply inattentive. It applies after the first strike to keep from plowing on down the road or pushing the first car it hit into the car in front and cascading on down the road.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
I'm pretty sure both books are routinely ignored.
I went to school with a number of Muslim students. They didn't attack me, or condemn me, or anything like that. I was actually in a study group with a couple of them for one semester. And at least one of them routinely ignored the Koran's prohibition on drinking.
I worked with at least one Muslim co-worker at my last job. He didn't attack me, or condemn me, or anything like that. I had a number of Muslim customers (including at least one who converted to Islam). None of them attacked me, or condemned me, or anything like that.
There are an estimated 3.3 million Muslims living in the U.S. I think we would have noticed if most of them were routinely attacking Christians.
It is not the religion, per se, that is the problem. It is fundamentalists or extremists who claim to be part of the religion that are the problem.
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
It is not the religion, per se, that is the problem. It is fundamentalists or extremists who claim to be part of the religion that are the problem.
I think we can safely say that it is both. Idiots are a problem, and people who get them worked up to do stupid things in the name of religion are also a problem. Take away that excuse and they'll have many less takers.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
He didn't.
But hey, fake news is only fake when we disagree with it, right.
Fortunately you have to be kind of an idiot to want to murder people like this anyway.
There's some evidence to suggest otherwise:
Which academic pursuit has been the most prevalent among Islamic jihadis?
It’s not the oddest question to come up at a dinner party, especially at the University of Oxford. But when it comes up between a Middle East expert and a sociologist, idle talk yields to a quest for data. That’s how political scientist Steffen Hertog and sociology professor Diego Gambetta soon found themselves poring through records of 404 people from 30 countries engaged in political violence between 2005 and 2007. Their answer? Engineering.
Of the 178 whose academic focus could be ascertained, 44 percent of those were engineers—most of them in electrical engineering, civil engineering, and computer studies. The next-largest group, Islamic studies, had fewer than half as many, at 19 percent [see table below, ”Fields of Study”].
* http://spectrum.ieee.org/telecom/security/extremist-engineers
Mexican's aren't converting or killing other people to make them Mexicans. Islamist's do this, are instructed to do this in their "holy" book. Salman Rushdee was correct. The Koran is the satanic verses. Only evil would do what the insane and difficult to read Koran would have you do. Keep them in their own lands to eternally fight and kill each other over which Islamist faction is the "correct" one.
Here's a story from the anointed Huffington Post claiming 80% of migrants are raped coming to the US. That's a pretty alarming figure. Here's another story on it by Fusion. Here's an Amnesty international story citing health care professionals claiming 6 out of 10 are abused.
There already is legal precedent: 8 U.S. Code 1182 - Inadmissible aliens clause f Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President. If you don't believe in western values don't come to the west. Show us a democratic country that is majority Muslim. Islam is more than a religion, what should be addressed upon entry is a question about supporting Sharia law. It's incompatible with western values. How do other religions work in Muslim majority countries? How do they treat women or gays? Why do you feel it is superior to the US present stance?
Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
Sort of, from what I've seen it's pretty hard to prevent attacks especially if the attacker is suicidal. It seems that a lot of these folks use the easiest least common denominator way of doing attacks. Can't get a gun, use a pressure cooker. Can't even get that use a truck... In the grand scheme of things a lot of these folks are trying to get publicity on the news which the media does indirectly help but I don't see how that will ever change. Well unless we want the government to start covering up all incidents as "accidents".
He was referring to illegal immigrants. Unfortunately, the press as a whole - the ones going on the whole tirade about "fake" news - has decided to call them "undocumented" immigrants. Which is probably what led to your confusion since most people are unfamiliar with that word in this context, so tend to ignore it. (Which is probably why the press is doing it - to try to shape policy by confusing people into conflating illegal immigrants with legal immigrants. It worked on you.)
There's a lot of reasons to dislike Trump, but this isn't one of them. If you're upset about it, direct your anger at the press which intentionally misled you. I'm wondering why people making unauthorized withdrawls at the bank and unlicensed executioners aren't getting the same treatment from them.
The difference is: the Bible has a New Testament. It's primary message? Scripture can be hard to interpret, so if you think it's telling you to hurt someone, that's how you know you're reading it wrong. That Jesus guy just wouldn't shut up about this: turn the other cheek, do unto others as you would have them do unto you, etc., etc.
The Koran desperately needs its own New Testament, just as Islam desperately needs it's own Reformation. That can only happen from within, of course, but we should recognize it for what it is.
Just in 2016 there were 2455 Islamic attacks in 60 countries, in which 21152 people were killed and 26499 injured. If that number surprises you, it's because the western press doesn't care to report attacks without western victims. Your false equivalence is obvious and foolish.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
The difference is: the Bible has a New Testament. It's primary message? Scripture can be hard to interpret, so if you think it's telling you to hurt someone, that's how you know you're reading it wrong. That Jesus guy just wouldn't shut up about this: turn the other cheek, do unto others as you would have them do unto you, etc., etc.
The Koran desperately needs its own New Testament, just as Islam desperately needs it's own Reformation. That can only happen from within, of course, but we should recognize it for what it is.
Just in 2016 there were 2455 Islamic attacks in 60 countries, in which 21152 people were killed and 26499 injured. If that number surprises you, it's because the western press doesn't care to report attacks without western victims. Your false equivalence is obvious and foolish.
If all those rules of the OT aren't important, then why did the Council of Nicaea and subsequent generations of scholars and clergy leave them in there? The OT is still part of the Bible, so by choosing not to follow those rules you are proving my point that both religions pick and choose (and different followers of the religions choose differently than others) which to follow. As for Jesus saying turn the other cheek, you are correct. But simply read the Wikipedia page on the Bible and Violence and you will see how Christians have still chose to interpret the Bible as advocating violence, and the page on Christianity and violence is also enlightening.
Personally, I am of the opinion that, as Islam is roughly 600 years newer than Christianity, if we look at what the Chrsitian world was like 600 years ago there are a lot of parallels between Christianity then and Islam now. Christianity had its reformation which left it a much less violent and (as it has modernized) more tolerant religion (there is of course a lot of intolerance left). Islam has the dual issue of not having gone through a reformation and being judged on modern terms while still in it's ancient form. The problem is that change has to come from within and it has to come organically, it can't be forced. And right now I don't see any indications of anything that could cause that change. Maybe if the Mosul Dam collapses and kills hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and displaces millions more it may be apocalyptic enough and attributable to ISIS (and therefore extremist Islam) that it might trigger a reformation or a rise of moderate Islam, but even that is a bit of a stretch.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil