There's a certain type of person who thinks that simple statements of truth are either wrong, stupid, or unnecessary. These people had a field day ridiculing Newton when he presented his 3 laws of motion.
From the wikipedia article on anti-lock brakes: Anti-lock brakes are the subject of some experiments centred around risk compensation theory, which asserts that drivers adapt to the safety benefit of ABS by driving more aggressively. In a Munich study, half a fleet of taxicabs was equipped with anti-lock brakes, while the other half had conventional brake systems. The crash rate was substantially the same for both types of cab, and Wilde concludes this was due to drivers of ABS-equipped cabs taking more risks, assuming that ABS would take care of them, while the non-ABS drivers drove more carefully since ABS would not be there to help in case of a dangerous situation.
From wikipedia's article on risk compensation: In 1981 John Adams published a paper, The efficacy of seatbelt legislation: A comparative study of road accident fatality statistics from 18 countries, Dept of Geography University College, London 1981 - published in 1982 by the Society of Automotive Engineers.[3] This showed that in the countries studied, which included states with and without seat belt laws, there was no correlation between the passing of seat belt legislation and the total reductions in injuries or fatalities. When all associated fatalities and injuries in road accidents were included, it appeared that some accidents were being displaced from car drivers to pedestrians and other road users.
I agree with the earlier poster. A spike would make the road much safer for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcycle riders at the expense of drivers.
Oh for craps sake. It does exist. From the wikipedia article you linked to: Exhaustion of rights - A concept in EU law similar to the US "First-sale doctrine
Gee... sounds an awful lot like a first sale doctrine that works differently. Did you even notice the other wild-ass assumptions in your post?
Why do Americans, and Slashdotters in particular, assume that the world's legal systems are based on the USA's? Errr... We do?
you'd think you'd realise that your laws are an amalgam of what's gone before - and that Common Law or other branches were around a long time before your country existed.
That's kinda obvious. I mean, the only other alternative is that the founding fathers knew no history or systems of government other than monarchies when they drafted the constitution. That's just seems silly.
The whole world doesn't want to be American you know. OMGWTFBBQ?
Strong statements require strong proof, and the only proof you offered us for your wack-ass statements is a single unrelated quote from the/. summary.
I agree completely (cancer is horrible). I don't understand why men (most cancers are preventable) take such offense (and can be detected early) to someone (if you stop smoking today, you could increase your life expectancy by 15%) putting off-topic (I like cats) subtle (I really like cats) messages in their prose.
Seriously! Like when the band Anthrax renamed themselves after the poisoned letters scare. Pretty much everyone's forgotten about the scare, and no one knows the band's new name.
But the basic myth comes from the fact that film is so convincing and thus you don't "need" more... as long as each frame is a blurred representation of the full period of time it is displayed for.
You can really see this behavior in '28 days later'. The screen goes dark and stuttery whenever a monster appears. All the cameraman did to create this effect is reduce the exposure time of each frame, so you see only a tiny fraction of the 1/24th second. This created an instantaneous snap-shot of the scene, instead of the motion blurred image we're used to. The reduced exposure time also had an added benefit of darkening the scenes.
oh for fucks sake, no one but first year CS students talk about sort algorithms. I was accidentally assigned to the CS dorm freshman year. Christ, you woulda thought sort algorithms were the pinnacle of philosophy based on those #$#%#$%#%$ 's conversations.
Electronic Arts almost defines "tarnished brand," considering their origins.
Really? EA was founded in 1982. I remember playing their horrible sports games at my friends' houses in the late 80s and early 90s. The games were almost non-interactive, but the moms kept shelling out $40 each year for the latest version number. Madden NFL 1989... Madden NFL 1990... Madden NFL 1991... All suck; no win.
This would be in contrast to science, where the goal is to find the rules and poke at them until you understand them ("find out what the constraints are, and why").
Really? I thought the goal of engineering was to find the rules and poke at them until you understand them ("find out what the constraints are, and why") and then do something useful with this knowledge. After all, would you rather hire the engineer who knew the rules or who knew and understood them? Or would you rather hire the string theorist, whose theories haven't yielded any testable predictions that were not already predicted by older theories.
BTW, you could substitute any number of common occupations into Timothy's post. Take out the bit about building codes and you could substitute in cook, artist, writer, scientist, businessman, citizen etc all while keeping the post sensible.
I cannot disagree more. Picture an ex-con. I bet you're picturing a man, huh? The only fix is affirmative action for men (or women, not really sure about the terminology). Either way. We need tougher laws for women. A man jaywalks? $50 fine. A women jaywalks? Chained heat 2
And it's been proven time and again that sooner or later there is no substitute for boots in contact with pavement.
Oh! I can play this game. It's been proven time and time again that monkeys cannot walk backwards. Oh... and that dogs run from their own shadows. If it's been proven time and time again, perhaps you could cite some of that proof?
Slashdot Mirror
There's a certain type of person who thinks that simple statements of truth are either wrong, stupid, or unnecessary. These people had a field day ridiculing Newton when he presented his 3 laws of motion.
That's why this is a joke: all alternating currents emit RF.
Worst joke ever.
lol, wut?
It would have been like a movie with huge setup, but within the first 3 minutes the hero stumble, break his neck, and dies.
Lawrence of Arabia?
You got bullied by the debate team? BWAHAHAHAHAHAA
is the NFL hockey or football?
From the wikipedia article on anti-lock brakes:
Anti-lock brakes are the subject of some experiments centred around risk compensation theory, which asserts that drivers adapt to the safety benefit of ABS by driving more aggressively. In a Munich study, half a fleet of taxicabs was equipped with anti-lock brakes, while the other half had conventional brake systems. The crash rate was substantially the same for both types of cab, and Wilde concludes this was due to drivers of ABS-equipped cabs taking more risks, assuming that ABS would take care of them, while the non-ABS drivers drove more carefully since ABS would not be there to help in case of a dangerous situation.
From wikipedia's article on risk compensation:
In 1981 John Adams published a paper, The efficacy of seatbelt legislation: A comparative study of road accident fatality statistics from 18 countries, Dept of Geography University College, London 1981 - published in 1982 by the Society of Automotive Engineers.[3] This showed that in the countries studied, which included states with and without seat belt laws, there was no correlation between the passing of seat belt legislation and the total reductions in injuries or fatalities. When all associated fatalities and injuries in road accidents were included, it appeared that some accidents were being displaced from car drivers to pedestrians and other road users.
I agree with the earlier poster. A spike would make the road much safer for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcycle riders at the expense of drivers.
Oh for craps sake. It does exist. From the wikipedia article you linked to:
Exhaustion of rights - A concept in EU law similar to the US "First-sale doctrine
Gee... sounds an awful lot like a first sale doctrine that works differently. Did you even notice the other wild-ass assumptions in your post?
Why do Americans, and Slashdotters in particular, assume that the world's legal systems are based on the USA's?
Errr... We do?
you'd think you'd realise that your laws are an amalgam of what's gone before - and that Common Law or other branches were around a long time before your country existed.
That's kinda obvious. I mean, the only other alternative is that the founding fathers knew no history or systems of government other than monarchies when they drafted the constitution. That's just seems silly.
The whole world doesn't want to be American you know.
OMGWTFBBQ?
Strong statements require strong proof, and the only proof you offered us for your wack-ass statements is a single unrelated quote from the /. summary.
Is /. implying only lesbians and men work at r*?
get it
I agree completely (cancer is horrible). I don't understand why men (most cancers are preventable) take such offense (and can be detected early) to someone (if you stop smoking today, you could increase your life expectancy by 15%) putting off-topic (I like cats) subtle (I really like cats) messages in their prose.
Good point.... I haven't seen Barack Hussein Mohammad Obama on Fox News once. What is he afraid we'll find out?
You know I've never seen Bin Laden and this Gaspar Llamazares fellow in the same place at the same time. Just saying...
Seriously! Like when the band Anthrax renamed themselves after the poisoned letters scare. Pretty much everyone's forgotten about the scare, and no one knows the band's new name.
Who cares?
How do I make sure I don't get pregnant while having sex every day without using any form of contraception?
Trick question!
Imagine a beowulf cluster of these
We also consume Netflix and Comcast OnDemand ravenously, and sometimes the Amazon download rental service or the local actual DVD rental store. Why?
Lack of something better to do? Addictive personality?
I think you have that backwards. Jesus didn't turn into a big pile of crackers and wine that churches are still doling out to this day.
But the basic myth comes from the fact that film is so convincing and thus you don't "need" more... as long as each frame is a blurred representation of the full period of time it is displayed for.
You can really see this behavior in '28 days later'. The screen goes dark and stuttery whenever a monster appears. All the cameraman did to create this effect is reduce the exposure time of each frame, so you see only a tiny fraction of the 1/24th second. This created an instantaneous snap-shot of the scene, instead of the motion blurred image we're used to. The reduced exposure time also had an added benefit of darkening the scenes.
oh for fucks sake, no one but first year CS students talk about sort algorithms. I was accidentally assigned to the CS dorm freshman year. Christ, you woulda thought sort algorithms were the pinnacle of philosophy based on those #$#%#$%#%$ 's conversations.
Electronic Arts almost defines "tarnished brand," considering their origins.
Really? EA was founded in 1982. I remember playing their horrible sports games at my friends' houses in the late 80s and early 90s. The games were almost non-interactive, but the moms kept shelling out $40 each year for the latest version number. Madden NFL 1989... Madden NFL 1990... Madden NFL 1991... All suck; no win.
This would be in contrast to science, where the goal is to find the rules and poke at them until you understand them ("find out what the constraints are, and why").
Really? I thought the goal of engineering was to find the rules and poke at them until you understand them ("find out what the constraints are, and why") and then do something useful with this knowledge. After all, would you rather hire the engineer who knew the rules or who knew and understood them? Or would you rather hire the string theorist, whose theories haven't yielded any testable predictions that were not already predicted by older theories.
BTW, you could substitute any number of common occupations into Timothy's post. Take out the bit about building codes and you could substitute in cook, artist, writer, scientist, businessman, citizen etc all while keeping the post sensible.
I cannot disagree more. Picture an ex-con. I bet you're picturing a man, huh? The only fix is affirmative action for men (or women, not really sure about the terminology). Either way. We need tougher laws for women. A man jaywalks? $50 fine. A women jaywalks? Chained heat 2
And it's been proven time and again that sooner or later there is no substitute for boots in contact with pavement.
Oh! I can play this game. It's been proven time and time again that monkeys cannot walk backwards. Oh... and that dogs run from their own shadows. If it's been proven time and time again, perhaps you could cite some of that proof?