The correct answer: the guy going 45 when a deer jumps out of the woods and bounds across the road.
I thought we were talking about Phoenix, AZ?:-)
In general, I agree with the rest of your post though. I was simply stating that unrealistic speed limits, e.g. 45 mph in a construction zone, even though there are no contsruction workers present, just cause that huge variance as you mentioned and I was stating that that variance causes accidents. Hence the 75 - 45 > 75 - 60 illustration. Yes, if it is unsafe to drive 60 mph, I am not advocating allowing the limit to be that anyway, I just think that a road that is normally 65-75 is not all of a sudden unsafe to drive at more than 45 because there are cones OFF THE ROAD when construction workers are not there.
I'm curious why you assume I'm going to ask for citations.
That was not directed at you specifically, it was toward anyone who read my post. Some people just like to contradict for the hell of it, and I was saving them some time. Sorry for the confusion.
I'm not talking about a car going 75 hitting my car going 45. I'm talking about a roadside worker or pedestrian getting hit by a car going 45. When I mentioned the ability to maneuver, I was talking about the person in the car. I doubt my reaction time would be fast enough to dodge a car going 45 or 75.
Then I suppose we are comparing apples to oranges. I was talking about when the speed limit is 45 even in the heat of the summer when, in Arizona, there would not be any construction workers out. They usually work at night or early morning to avoid the heat, and at noon, I think putting the speed limit back to 55-60 from 45 would make it safer overall as far as vehicular accidents go. Regardless of speed limits posted, there will always be idiots driving 75 if it's a freeway. If there aren't construction workers present to justify the 45 mph limit, why not change it to 55-60 when they aren't present? Like school zones that say "15 mph when children present" (note, these are much less common now than the "15 mph between 6 am and 4 pm" ones, but I used to see them all the time).
Okay, I AM an uninformed American. I didn't realize the 429 included VAT already, due to my lack of reading comprehension. You were adjusting the $499 to include VAT, which makes it a direct comparison. Sorry!
If you're going to include VAT, include US sales tax too:
£429 * 1.075 (approximate sales tax in the US) = £461.18
£461.18 - £399.27 = £61.91
No, this is still not 150%, but it's more than three times the £20 that you said it was. Unless there is some other "sales tax" in the UK other than VAT, in which case you can call me an uninformed American and move on.:-)
Who has more time, the speeder doing 75 coming up behind someone going the speed limit at 45, or the speeder doing 75 coming up behind someone going the speed limit at 60?
Oh, and one more thing. I said "You get hit at 75 - 60 = 15 mph" but realistically, if you are going 60 and they are going 75, they are much more likely to have time to swerve/slow down to NOT hit you than if you were going 45.
Well, I can tell you that I would rather be hit by a car going 45 than 75.
Yes, but consider what is actually the case here: You are going 45 (because you care about the speed limit) and they are going 75 (because they don't care). You get hit at relativistically 75 - 45 = 30 mph. If however, the speed limit remained at 60, you are going 60, and they are going 75. You get hit at 75 - 60 = 15 mph. Okay, now which of these scenarios would you prefer? Please note that I am writing this as a native Arizonan. I am mostly against speed cameras because they don't get speeders to slow down ALL the time, they just get them to slam on their brakes when they see the camera, and this, I believe, causes more accidents than having everyone just speed a little. Please note before you add a [citation needed] to this that I am not stating this as fact; it is purely anecdotal.
There are five boxes to use in the defense of Liberty: The Soap Box, the Mail Box, the Ballot Box, the Jury Box, and the Ammunition Box. Please use them in that order.
1100W/m^2... so with enough area, we'd have limitless energy... how does that not meet our needs? Who says we need to stay on EARTH with our solar panels? Our available area is practically limitless, so it would take some time, but we COULD, theoretically speaking, run entirely off solar power.
Which is exactly what the calculator that you're claiming is wrong said.
Excuse me? I think I said "so that calculator is accurate"... I'm sorry that your sarcasm detector is throwing false alarms but I was just backing up the calculator with some solid math! I was SUPPORTING the calculator, not claiming it was wrong.
No, I haven't, but I didn't say that 0.14 pixels could be living all happily on their own. I said 79.86ppi (pixels per inch). So perhaps there are 80 pixels, and just a very small part of one of them is overlapping the "1 inch" mark? How about you just shut up from now on to avoid looking stupid?
But what is the significant difference in a person at 20 years 364 days vs. 20 years 365 days? Is there some sort of "maturity switch" that is magically flipped? Do the gods of time descend upon you and bestow you with something special?
That reminds me of a video I saw by Barats and Bereta. He calls an insurance company and argues about why it's all of a sudden cheaper when you turn 25 and why men cost more than women along with a couple other things. Check it out, it's pretty funny! (Some of the language used in it may be NSFW, so make sure you have headphones... he says "penis" quite a bit)
I don't see how that's confusing... There is the original iPhone (iPhone), the 2nd generation with 3G capabilities (iPhone 3G), the 3rd generation with some new features still on the 3G network (iPhone 3GS)... Would you rather they had called the 2nd iPhone the "iPhone 2G with 3G capabilities"? Now THAT would have been confusing...
Yes, I am from America, and I would say "couldn't care less" so I agree with the parent.
Another commonly messed up saying is when people say "You can't have your cake and eat it too." The original saying was "You can't eat your cake and have it too" which makes more sense because once you eat it you can no longer have it, whereas, you CAN have your cake and then eat it. But because so many people have messed this up, people have just come to learn that the first one means the same as the second (just like you know that "could care less" was supposed to mean "couldn't care less")
Slashdot Mirror
The correct answer: the guy going 45 when a deer jumps out of the woods and bounds across the road.
I thought we were talking about Phoenix, AZ? :-)
In general, I agree with the rest of your post though. I was simply stating that unrealistic speed limits, e.g. 45 mph in a construction zone, even though there are no contsruction workers present, just cause that huge variance as you mentioned and I was stating that that variance causes accidents. Hence the 75 - 45 > 75 - 60 illustration. Yes, if it is unsafe to drive 60 mph, I am not advocating allowing the limit to be that anyway, I just think that a road that is normally 65-75 is not all of a sudden unsafe to drive at more than 45 because there are cones OFF THE ROAD when construction workers are not there.
I'm curious why you assume I'm going to ask for citations.
That was not directed at you specifically, it was toward anyone who read my post. Some people just like to contradict for the hell of it, and I was saving them some time. Sorry for the confusion.
I'm not talking about a car going 75 hitting my car going 45. I'm talking about a roadside worker or pedestrian getting hit by a car going 45. When I mentioned the ability to maneuver, I was talking about the person in the car. I doubt my reaction time would be fast enough to dodge a car going 45 or 75.
Then I suppose we are comparing apples to oranges. I was talking about when the speed limit is 45 even in the heat of the summer when, in Arizona, there would not be any construction workers out. They usually work at night or early morning to avoid the heat, and at noon, I think putting the speed limit back to 55-60 from 45 would make it safer overall as far as vehicular accidents go. Regardless of speed limits posted, there will always be idiots driving 75 if it's a freeway. If there aren't construction workers present to justify the 45 mph limit, why not change it to 55-60 when they aren't present? Like school zones that say "15 mph when children present" (note, these are much less common now than the "15 mph between 6 am and 4 pm" ones, but I used to see them all the time).
That "worst" version is a lot more usable than any netbook near the same price. Higher resolution and a better quality screen, for example.
Really? 155 ppi, $330 as opposed to the iPad's 132 ppi, $500. With the $170 left over, you could even get some pretty nice upgrades.
Okay, I AM an uninformed American. I didn't realize the 429 included VAT already, due to my lack of reading comprehension. You were adjusting the $499 to include VAT, which makes it a direct comparison. Sorry!
There's a £20 bump, and no more.
If you're going to include VAT, include US sales tax too:
£429 * 1.075 (approximate sales tax in the US) = £461.18
£461.18 - £399.27 = £61.91
No, this is still not 150%, but it's more than three times the £20 that you said it was. Unless there is some other "sales tax" in the UK other than VAT, in which case you can call me an uninformed American and move on. :-)
I think if we just stopped allowing people like this to drive, the roads would be a much safer place...
Who has more time, the speeder doing 75 coming up behind someone going the speed limit at 45, or the speeder doing 75 coming up behind someone going the speed limit at 60?
I say, get the pedestrians off the freeway!!! (This is where the majority of the speed camera vans are)
Hey said "probably not." That is a speculation/opinion not a fact. No citation necessary.
Oh, and one more thing. I said "You get hit at 75 - 60 = 15 mph" but realistically, if you are going 60 and they are going 75, they are much more likely to have time to swerve/slow down to NOT hit you than if you were going 45.
Well, I can tell you that I would rather be hit by a car going 45 than 75.
Yes, but consider what is actually the case here: You are going 45 (because you care about the speed limit) and they are going 75 (because they don't care). You get hit at relativistically 75 - 45 = 30 mph. If however, the speed limit remained at 60, you are going 60, and they are going 75. You get hit at 75 - 60 = 15 mph. Okay, now which of these scenarios would you prefer? Please note that I am writing this as a native Arizonan. I am mostly against speed cameras because they don't get speeders to slow down ALL the time, they just get them to slam on their brakes when they see the camera, and this, I believe, causes more accidents than having everyone just speed a little. Please note before you add a [citation needed] to this that I am not stating this as fact; it is purely anecdotal.
There are five boxes to use in the defense of Liberty: The Soap Box, the Mail Box, the Ballot Box, the Jury Box, and the Ammunition Box. Please use them in that order.
Ballot Box is two steps before Ammunition Box.
Electronically, the SIM and MicroSIM are the same...
OH RLY?
That's actually pretty interesting. I don't know about economic feasibility, but interesting none the less.
1100W/m^2... so with enough area, we'd have limitless energy... how does that not meet our needs? Who says we need to stay on EARTH with our solar panels? Our available area is practically limitless, so it would take some time, but we COULD, theoretically speaking, run entirely off solar power.
Which is exactly what the calculator that you're claiming is wrong said.
Excuse me? I think I said "so that calculator is accurate"... I'm sorry that your sarcasm detector is throwing false alarms but I was just backing up the calculator with some solid math! I was SUPPORTING the calculator, not claiming it was wrong.
Shift? Just Ctrl C, Ctrl V should work...
Same goes for me here at Arizona State University. I'd recommend the GP goes for CS.
...makes the new cells appear in the right place...
What if you already have a head in the right place (assuming the "right place" is on top, between your shoulders)?
No, I haven't, but I didn't say that 0.14 pixels could be living all happily on their own. I said 79.86ppi (pixels per inch). So perhaps there are 80 pixels, and just a very small part of one of them is overlapping the "1 inch" mark? How about you just shut up from now on to avoid looking stupid?
Well, you're demanding 60 fps... A much cheaper setup would be possible for the 10-20 fps that grandma demands.
sqrt(4000^2 + 2000^2)/56 = 79.86ppi so that calculator is accurate.
But what is the significant difference in a person at 20 years 364 days vs. 20 years 365 days? Is there some sort of "maturity switch" that is magically flipped? Do the gods of time descend upon you and bestow you with something special?
That reminds me of a video I saw by Barats and Bereta. He calls an insurance company and argues about why it's all of a sudden cheaper when you turn 25 and why men cost more than women along with a couple other things. Check it out, it's pretty funny! (Some of the language used in it may be NSFW, so make sure you have headphones... he says "penis" quite a bit)
I don't see how that's confusing... There is the original iPhone (iPhone), the 2nd generation with 3G capabilities (iPhone 3G), the 3rd generation with some new features still on the 3G network (iPhone 3GS)... Would you rather they had called the 2nd iPhone the "iPhone 2G with 3G capabilities"? Now THAT would have been confusing...
Yes, I am from America, and I would say "couldn't care less" so I agree with the parent.
Another commonly messed up saying is when people say "You can't have your cake and eat it too." The original saying was "You can't eat your cake and have it too" which makes more sense because once you eat it you can no longer have it, whereas, you CAN have your cake and then eat it. But because so many people have messed this up, people have just come to learn that the first one means the same as the second (just like you know that "could care less" was supposed to mean "couldn't care less")