(Most) speed cameras do, for some reason though ANPR cameras (including 'SPECS' ANPR speed cameras) usually look at the front, perhaps to catch a view of the driver if needed. It's common knowledge that you can 'lorry surf', meaning drive so that a high truck is between you and the cameras at the right moment; the cameras usually being mounted high above the kerb.
Have you ever heard of network effects? Most companies don't accept cards other than Mastercard and Visa for payment because there's no point accepting a payment method hardly anyone has, most consumers don't have other cards because there's no point having a card that you can't actually pay anywhere with, and most banks don't offer anything else because no consumer wants them. So Mastercard and Visa effectively have a strangehold on the payments market.
Heh, I applied for an AmEx card last week, sounds like I shouldn't have bothered;)
LCDs are so 2008. Is there any indium in LED monitors?
With the exception of a couple of OLED smartphones, 'LED' monitors and TV sets *are* LCD. The 'LED' part is the backlight, instead of fluorescent tubes.
When I heard about this story for the first time on the radio this morning, my reaction was essentially "WTF- they're policing untasteful comments on twitter now?".
Having read about it a little more, my reaction mellowed significantly. Actual threats (albeit unrealistic) are just about within what I would consider to be the remit of the police. Of course it would depend on what exactly is done by them about it. Simply arresting and cautioning him would strike me as being proportionate. Any kind of sentence beyond perhaps a small (less than £50) fine would probably not be.
The Transcontinental Railroad cost $1.2 billion in 2012 dollars. The Eisenhower Interstate System cost $425 billion of the same.
Are you sure you don't understand why a decentralized "pod" system wouldn't work?
One coast-to-coast (well, west coast to somewhere-in-the-middle, to be pedantic) railroad costs less than a whole network of many coast-to-coast, north-to-south and everywhere in between highways? Really??
I would say "you're comparing apples to oranges" but it wouldn't even come close. You're comparing one apple to a crate of oranges.
Simple, they panic. I know everyone on here thinks they are far too smart, and this could never happen to them, but it can. When your car starts accelerating wildly, your brain goes into 'I am about to be killed' mode. You do not think, you react.
This. I'm as guilty as anyone of thinking "Oh, but I'm a smart person, I know what to do.." and I even drive a manual, making 'unintended acceleration' even easier for me to resolve. But; once when I first had my current car, my first with cruise control, I unintentionally pressed the 'resume' button that activates the cruise control to the last speed it was set at. I believe the setpoint in question was somewhat over 70mph. I was in a variable speed limit zone set to something like 40mph (which was why I wanted the cruise control). The car shot off on its mission to go along at 80mph or whatever, straight towards a speed camera site (there was no-one in front of me, thankfully). Now, I know and knew that pressing the brake would immediately disengage the cruise control; but for about 2 seconds at least I was shitting bricks not knowing what to do.
Having one's car unexpectedly accelerate is a disconcerting experience, so it's not surprising that people panic and end up in trouble.
That aside, what do you suggest we do when our perfect little ball of green and blue is threatened by something we have no control over? Wish we had "wasted" the money and gotten spread out, is my bet.
Money is not a limited resource. The stuff it represents or buys is finite. It's not a question of "how much money are we prepared to spend?" but rather "how much of of our resources and labour are we prepared to dedicate?". In fact, for any government-funded program, it's actually a question of "how much of the resources taxed from the population are we prepared to dedicate?".
A few places have thought over the years that "money is not a limited resource, so lets print some more" (1930s Germany, Zimbabwe recently as examples). It doesn't work out very well.
Have you compared your speedometer to a satnav? Most cars over-indicate by about 10%, so an indicated 77 is really 70. (Fiats can be an exception). My current car (Toyota) is out by exactly 10% from 30 to 70. I had a Ford in the 90s which was 10mph out at 70; this is legal. A colleague had a BMW, no less, that indicated 95 at a real 80mph.
Since the police normally ignore drivers who behave safely who are doing a real 80 on motorways, an indicated 85 is within what they will accept.
Funnily enough I did this last night; at 80mph (by GPS) my speedometer reads 84mph, a 5% over-read. This is in a 2006 BMW.
If I travel at 80mph in the UK I am constantly overtaken. I would say that 85 is my usual speed in this car, but when I had a citroen xantia cruising at 105 was no problem.
This. On certain English motorways at certain times of the day the average speed of traffic is 90-100mph. I've seen (once) around 20 cars flagrantly driving at 110mph in front of police (ordinary motorists, not a race meet/cruise or anything like that).
When I've visited Scotland I've found the locals to drive even faster...
Oh, that's nice. I can give my money to speculators! Let me get right on that.
Can anyone explain the purpose of "speculators"? When I ask "What do speculators produce?" the answer seems to always be, "Speculators produce liquidity in the market."
That sounds suspiciously like when my mom used to say "Because I said so."
When speculators are right, they even out price fluctuations by buying when they believe a commodity is unreasonably cheap, and selling when it's expensive. The act of buying makes the 'cheap' price more expensive by taking some of the commodity off the market, and conversely selling when expensive makes the commodity cheaper at that time. In non-price terms, speculators soak up surpluses when they exist, and add extra supply in times of shortage.
When speculators are wrong or generally stupid, all hell breaks loose. Careless/stupid speculators buy in a rising market, driving the price up faster, then all sell at the same time when they realise that prices can go down as well as up, causing and then bursting a classic bubble.
so, what your saying is you don't believe climate science even though it is overwhelmingly verified & agreed upon because it would make you uncomfortable & maybe inconvenience you a little bit?
So blind, egotistical, self-interest trumps good science. Yeah, that'll work
Try reading my post again. I have expressed no opinion on whether the science is right or not. I am saying that the stakes are much higher for the average person than for other areas of science.
The difference is that when a scientist says "we believe that there is a diamond planet" people either say "cool" or "I doubt that, but it doesn't really matter". When climate scientists say is often used to justify restricting in various ways things that most people either rely on or enjoy. That's the difference.
pioneered by Mercedes Benz in their most luxurious line of vehicles.
Your average long-haul truck driver is unlikely to see this technology extended to the working class in his lifetime.
Just like disc brakes, power windows, electronic stability control, airbags and a/c never made it from Mercedes to trucks? Oh wait, they did.
There are several factors at play here
on
The Post-Idea World
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Ideas are plentiful. With ~7,000,000,000 people in the world and a large & growing fraction of them having access to the internet, there are ideas everywhere. You're reading my ideas right now, along with those of hundreds of other people all on this one page.
Ideas are easy. Any idiot can come up with ideas. World peace. Flying cars that run on dog poo. Cities on the moon. Ideas are substantially easier to come up with than they are to actually implement. People who come up with 'concepts' for residential towers with farms hanging off the sides; or city vehicles with odd numbers of wheels powered by unobtanium, or political systems where everyone just gets along and are happy are ten a penny, and the abundance of communication that the internet provides makes this painfully obvious.
There are fewer 'good' big ideas left. With all the ideas that everyone has already had and are coming up with all the time, fewer new ideas are actually 'original'; and the originality of an idea can be quickly proved or disproved with 30 seconds on Google.
Specialisation. With the bigger ideas aleady thought of and written about, the lions share of ideas these days is in specialised niches; the 'long tail' if you will. The problem is that such ideas cannot capture the imagination of people at large. There are people coming more ideas than ever, but it's hard to raise enthusiasm for big ideas in computer science or industrial management.
"Good-old-fashioned nostalgia" History seems to be chock full of bold people with big ideas, but a lot of the time it's just dumb nostalgia. Sure, those Victorians wrote a lot of well-considered books and built a fair deal of physical and social infrastructure that persists to this day, but we're talking about 60-100 years here. The innovations and achievements of the past 60 years blow any other 60 year period in history into oblivion. Of course in the past everyone was more 'rational' (ignoring the bigger participation in and seriousness of religion then), was 'healthier' (ignoring the starvation), 'got on better' (ignoring the regular riots/wars/crime) blah blah blah. Probably back then concerned intellectuals railed against the talents of the world being wasted on arranging girders to support mechanical horses, or on the manufacture of cloth etc. No doubt in 100 years time people will be talking in hushed tones about those 'heroes' of the early 21st century, when there were big ideas, and people lived happily in peace without the nefarious influence of xx yy...
Hell, I'm a forklift dealer; so if all the trucks in the world were replaced with forklifts than I'd be an exceedingly happy man- but your thinking is so fantastically full of shit as to be unbelieveable.
You want to replace diesel trucks designed to run on the roads with other diesel trucks, designed to run for a hundred yards at a time, with a top speed of ~5mph, with big steel forks sticking out of the front; in the name of effeciency? Did you guess that the average forklift weighs about 2x its max payload unladen, and will get ~2-5mpg (carrying ~2.5t max, vs. ~20mpg for a van that would carry the same, or vs. ~10mpg for a truck that would carry 10-25t)? Do you have any understanding of anything, other than dogmatic "road vehicles==BAD"?
Maybe the process will continue and we'll have roundabouts with subsidiary circles to control the access to the bigger circle until the roads begin to look like Mandelbrot curves.
I'd like to start by saying that I'm British, from an area with lots of roundabouts.
Roundabouts do work, but only in certain circumstances. They work well for junctions where there isn't a 'dominant flow' of traffic in a particular direction and traffic isn't too heavy; right turns (left turns in the US) are easier to accomodate than at a traffic light junction, most of the time there is a short wait for traffic entering (if at all) and no particular movement clogs up the other arms of the roundabout.
Where there is a dominant flow, traffic from the other directions can be made to wait a very long time for a gap if one of the roads is constantly spewing traffic onto the roundabout. If the traffic exceeds the capacity of the roundabout, or there is a bottleneck on one of the roads off the roundabout, then all hell breaks loose as traffic is unable to leave and blocks off all the other exits.
In some situations roundabouts can increase accidents; especially when placed to connect a very minor road with little traffic to a major one, as drivers can get so used to 'nothing coming' from the minor road that they plough onto the roundabout without looking properly. Roundabouts near petrol stations can suffer from lots of spinouts, as drivers skid on diesel spilt from overfilled trucks.
(Perhaps) interestingly, in the UK the current fad is to put traffic signals onto roundabouts to increase their capacity, as they're often used here for major junctions with a shitload of traffic, and they jam up. For light to moderate traffic loads, connecting roads of relatively equal importance, they work well.
Hey, my car is dirty. I have the right to a clean car, my friend over there says so. I require you to wash it, right now. After all, society works by helping each other out, doesn't it?
Saying "Say, how about helping me out with this?" or "Do this for me and I'll do something for you in return" is how society cooperates. Saying "I convinced some powerful organisation to put you in jail unless you give me that" is not cooperation, sorry.
No, the right is defined by authoritarian ideology, centralized control of people but minimal control of business groups (corporations, trade associations), valuing property higher than labor, enforcement of principles by coercion. The left is defined by voluntary ideology, decentralized control of people but centralized control of business groups, valuing labor higher than property, encouragement of principles by incentive.
There is little to no left in the US. There is a lot of right, to a mostly greater or somewhat lesser degree, especially among government officials.
But you're the one claiming equivalence between left and right. Yet when asked you claim that the terms mean nothing. I say your equivalence is simply false.
So, where does minimum coersion, minimum control of business groups and decentralised control of people come on that scale? That's the failure of it, it implies bundling of ideals that isn't really necessary.
Or Sony fired them then purposely neutered their security systems to start a false-flag operation to convince the world governments to enact stricter internet standards in order to stop piracy.
Or Bush ordered the hack because PSN users were close to uncovering the truth about the involvement of giant lizard-built space lasers in the 9/11 setup...
'Why Bush' you ask? Well, Obama is literally a puppet, a mechatronic puppet; controlled by brainwaves from the fleet of orbiting spacecraft piloted by angels who protect us from the lizards. And....
UL sucks horribly and half of them were 100% incapable of understanding my device or how it works.
CE certification is superior and the Europeans actually have an education.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but CE is a 'self certified' system. European engineers are perpetually complaining about CE being stamped on anything and everything, with no testing whatsoever, entirely legally and with no enforcement.
I know because I used to do standards compliance (amongst other things) in a previous job at an electronic manufacturer in the UK.
There is this thing called causality. It tends to keep things in chronological order. I know that concepts like "before" and "after" an event are strange to you, but they do make a difference. The math just won't let you swap them around like that unless you're very bad at carrying the signs.
Slashdot Mirror
I thought UK cameras looked at the rear plate.
(Most) speed cameras do, for some reason though ANPR cameras (including 'SPECS' ANPR speed cameras) usually look at the front, perhaps to catch a view of the driver if needed. It's common knowledge that you can 'lorry surf', meaning drive so that a high truck is between you and the cameras at the right moment; the cameras usually being mounted high above the kerb.
Have you ever heard of network effects? Most companies don't accept cards other than Mastercard and Visa for payment because there's no point accepting a payment method hardly anyone has, most consumers don't have other cards because there's no point having a card that you can't actually pay anywhere with, and most banks don't offer anything else because no consumer wants them. So Mastercard and Visa effectively have a strangehold on the payments market.
Heh, I applied for an AmEx card last week, sounds like I shouldn't have bothered ;)
Hey! Here's an idea -- MS could bless WINE and sell each of the Linux users a license to run a full-on win32/64 library. Yeah!
Silly AC, only a religious organisation could bless wine. It'd have to be Apple...
Can anyone find the mistake?
LCDs are so 2008. Is there any indium in LED monitors?
With the exception of a couple of OLED smartphones, 'LED' monitors and TV sets *are* LCD. The 'LED' part is the backlight, instead of fluorescent tubes.
When I heard about this story for the first time on the radio this morning, my reaction was essentially "WTF- they're policing untasteful comments on twitter now?".
Having read about it a little more, my reaction mellowed significantly. Actual threats (albeit unrealistic) are just about within what I would consider to be the remit of the police. Of course it would depend on what exactly is done by them about it. Simply arresting and cautioning him would strike me as being proportionate. Any kind of sentence beyond perhaps a small (less than £50) fine would probably not be.
The Transcontinental Railroad cost $1.2 billion in 2012 dollars. The Eisenhower Interstate System cost $425 billion of the same.
Are you sure you don't understand why a decentralized "pod" system wouldn't work?
One coast-to-coast (well, west coast to somewhere-in-the-middle, to be pedantic) railroad costs less than a whole network of many coast-to-coast, north-to-south and everywhere in between highways? Really??
I would say "you're comparing apples to oranges" but it wouldn't even come close. You're comparing one apple to a crate of oranges.
Simple, they panic. I know everyone on here thinks they are far too smart, and this could never happen to them, but it can. When your car starts accelerating wildly, your brain goes into 'I am about to be killed' mode. You do not think, you react.
This. I'm as guilty as anyone of thinking "Oh, but I'm a smart person, I know what to do.." and I even drive a manual, making 'unintended acceleration' even easier for me to resolve. But; once when I first had my current car, my first with cruise control, I unintentionally pressed the 'resume' button that activates the cruise control to the last speed it was set at. I believe the setpoint in question was somewhat over 70mph. I was in a variable speed limit zone set to something like 40mph (which was why I wanted the cruise control). The car shot off on its mission to go along at 80mph or whatever, straight towards a speed camera site (there was no-one in front of me, thankfully). Now, I know and knew that pressing the brake would immediately disengage the cruise control; but for about 2 seconds at least I was shitting bricks not knowing what to do.
Having one's car unexpectedly accelerate is a disconcerting experience, so it's not surprising that people panic and end up in trouble.
Assuming you are going 100mph your car produces 60HP? I don't think a 60HP car can do 100MPH.
I think your number is closer to a motorcycle. Granted a nice bike.
A 60bhp car can do 94mph- http://www.topgear.com/uk/ford/fiesta/spec/b4-142292-3
Money is not a limited resource.
That aside, what do you suggest we do when our perfect little ball of green and blue is threatened by something we have no control over? Wish we had "wasted" the money and gotten spread out, is my bet.
Money is not a limited resource. The stuff it represents or buys is finite. It's not a question of "how much money are we prepared to spend?" but rather "how much of of our resources and labour are we prepared to dedicate?". In fact, for any government-funded program, it's actually a question of "how much of the resources taxed from the population are we prepared to dedicate?".
A few places have thought over the years that "money is not a limited resource, so lets print some more" (1930s Germany, Zimbabwe recently as examples). It doesn't work out very well.
Have you compared your speedometer to a satnav? Most cars over-indicate by about 10%, so an indicated 77 is really 70. (Fiats can be an exception). My current car (Toyota) is out by exactly 10% from 30 to 70. I had a Ford in the 90s which was 10mph out at 70; this is legal. A colleague had a BMW, no less, that indicated 95 at a real 80mph.
Since the police normally ignore drivers who behave safely who are doing a real 80 on motorways, an indicated 85 is within what they will accept.
Funnily enough I did this last night; at 80mph (by GPS) my speedometer reads 84mph, a 5% over-read. This is in a 2006 BMW.
If I travel at 80mph in the UK I am constantly overtaken. I would say that 85 is my usual speed in this car, but when I had a citroen xantia cruising at 105 was no problem.
This. On certain English motorways at certain times of the day the average speed of traffic is 90-100mph. I've seen (once) around 20 cars flagrantly driving at 110mph in front of police (ordinary motorists, not a race meet/cruise or anything like that).
When I've visited Scotland I've found the locals to drive even faster...
Can anyone explain the purpose of "speculators"? When I ask "What do speculators produce?" the answer seems to always be, "Speculators produce liquidity in the market."
That sounds suspiciously like when my mom used to say "Because I said so."
When speculators are right, they even out price fluctuations by buying when they believe a commodity is unreasonably cheap, and selling when it's expensive. The act of buying makes the 'cheap' price more expensive by taking some of the commodity off the market, and conversely selling when expensive makes the commodity cheaper at that time. In non-price terms, speculators soak up surpluses when they exist, and add extra supply in times of shortage.
When speculators are wrong or generally stupid, all hell breaks loose. Careless/stupid speculators buy in a rising market, driving the price up faster, then all sell at the same time when they realise that prices can go down as well as up, causing and then bursting a classic bubble.
so, what your saying is you don't believe climate science even though it is overwhelmingly verified & agreed upon because it would make you uncomfortable & maybe inconvenience you a little bit?
So blind, egotistical, self-interest trumps good science. Yeah, that'll work
Try reading my post again. I have expressed no opinion on whether the science is right or not. I am saying that the stakes are much higher for the average person than for other areas of science.
"what" climate scientists say, FFS.
The difference is that when a scientist says "we believe that there is a diamond planet" people either say "cool" or "I doubt that, but it doesn't really matter". When climate scientists say is often used to justify restricting in various ways things that most people either rely on or enjoy. That's the difference.
pioneered by Mercedes Benz in their most luxurious line of vehicles. Your average long-haul truck driver is unlikely to see this technology extended to the working class in his lifetime.
Just like disc brakes, power windows, electronic stability control, airbags and a/c never made it from Mercedes to trucks? Oh wait, they did.
Ideas are plentiful. With ~7,000,000,000 people in the world and a large & growing fraction of them having access to the internet, there are ideas everywhere. You're reading my ideas right now, along with those of hundreds of other people all on this one page.
Ideas are easy. Any idiot can come up with ideas. World peace. Flying cars that run on dog poo. Cities on the moon. Ideas are substantially easier to come up with than they are to actually implement. People who come up with 'concepts' for residential towers with farms hanging off the sides; or city vehicles with odd numbers of wheels powered by unobtanium, or political systems where everyone just gets along and are happy are ten a penny, and the abundance of communication that the internet provides makes this painfully obvious.
There are fewer 'good' big ideas left. With all the ideas that everyone has already had and are coming up with all the time, fewer new ideas are actually 'original'; and the originality of an idea can be quickly proved or disproved with 30 seconds on Google.
Specialisation. With the bigger ideas aleady thought of and written about, the lions share of ideas these days is in specialised niches; the 'long tail' if you will. The problem is that such ideas cannot capture the imagination of people at large. There are people coming more ideas than ever, but it's hard to raise enthusiasm for big ideas in computer science or industrial management.
"Good-old-fashioned nostalgia" History seems to be chock full of bold people with big ideas, but a lot of the time it's just dumb nostalgia. Sure, those Victorians wrote a lot of well-considered books and built a fair deal of physical and social infrastructure that persists to this day, but we're talking about 60-100 years here. The innovations and achievements of the past 60 years blow any other 60 year period in history into oblivion. Of course in the past everyone was more 'rational' (ignoring the bigger participation in and seriousness of religion then), was 'healthier' (ignoring the starvation), 'got on better' (ignoring the regular riots/wars/crime) blah blah blah. Probably back then concerned intellectuals railed against the talents of the world being wasted on arranging girders to support mechanical horses, or on the manufacture of cloth etc. No doubt in 100 years time people will be talking in hushed tones about those 'heroes' of the early 21st century, when there were big ideas, and people lived happily in peace without the nefarious influence of xx yy...
Forklifts or other small vehicles, of course.
Hell, I'm a forklift dealer; so if all the trucks in the world were replaced with forklifts than I'd be an exceedingly happy man- but your thinking is so fantastically full of shit as to be unbelieveable.
You want to replace diesel trucks designed to run on the roads with other diesel trucks, designed to run for a hundred yards at a time, with a top speed of ~5mph, with big steel forks sticking out of the front; in the name of effeciency? Did you guess that the average forklift weighs about 2x its max payload unladen, and will get ~2-5mpg (carrying ~2.5t max, vs. ~20mpg for a van that would carry the same, or vs. ~10mpg for a truck that would carry 10-25t)? Do you have any understanding of anything, other than dogmatic "road vehicles==BAD"?
Maybe the process will continue and we'll have roundabouts with subsidiary circles to control the access to the bigger circle until the roads begin to look like Mandelbrot curves.
Already exists I'm afraid.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_Roundabout_(Swindon) .. there's one in my home town too.. http://maps.google.com/maps?q=52.631057,-1.690006&ll=52.631057,-1.690006&spn=0.008465,0.017273&t=h&z=16
I'd like to start by saying that I'm British, from an area with lots of roundabouts.
Roundabouts do work, but only in certain circumstances. They work well for junctions where there isn't a 'dominant flow' of traffic in a particular direction and traffic isn't too heavy; right turns (left turns in the US) are easier to accomodate than at a traffic light junction, most of the time there is a short wait for traffic entering (if at all) and no particular movement clogs up the other arms of the roundabout.
Where there is a dominant flow, traffic from the other directions can be made to wait a very long time for a gap if one of the roads is constantly spewing traffic onto the roundabout. If the traffic exceeds the capacity of the roundabout, or there is a bottleneck on one of the roads off the roundabout, then all hell breaks loose as traffic is unable to leave and blocks off all the other exits.
In some situations roundabouts can increase accidents; especially when placed to connect a very minor road with little traffic to a major one, as drivers can get so used to 'nothing coming' from the minor road that they plough onto the roundabout without looking properly. Roundabouts near petrol stations can suffer from lots of spinouts, as drivers skid on diesel spilt from overfilled trucks.
(Perhaps) interestingly, in the UK the current fad is to put traffic signals onto roundabouts to increase their capacity, as they're often used here for major junctions with a shitload of traffic, and they jam up. For light to moderate traffic loads, connecting roads of relatively equal importance, they work well.
Hey, my car is dirty. I have the right to a clean car, my friend over there says so. I require you to wash it, right now. After all, society works by helping each other out, doesn't it?
Saying "Say, how about helping me out with this?" or "Do this for me and I'll do something for you in return" is how society cooperates. Saying "I convinced some powerful organisation to put you in jail unless you give me that" is not cooperation, sorry.
No, the right is defined by authoritarian ideology, centralized control of people but minimal control of business groups (corporations, trade associations), valuing property higher than labor, enforcement of principles by coercion. The left is defined by voluntary ideology, decentralized control of people but centralized control of business groups, valuing labor higher than property, encouragement of principles by incentive.
There is little to no left in the US. There is a lot of right, to a mostly greater or somewhat lesser degree, especially among government officials.
But you're the one claiming equivalence between left and right. Yet when asked you claim that the terms mean nothing. I say your equivalence is simply false.
So, where does minimum coersion, minimum control of business groups and decentralised control of people come on that scale? That's the failure of it, it implies bundling of ideals that isn't really necessary.
Or Sony fired them then purposely neutered their security systems to start a false-flag operation to convince the world governments to enact stricter internet standards in order to stop piracy.
Or Bush ordered the hack because PSN users were close to uncovering the truth about the involvement of giant lizard-built space lasers in the 9/11 setup...
'Why Bush' you ask? Well, Obama is literally a puppet, a mechatronic puppet; controlled by brainwaves from the fleet of orbiting spacecraft piloted by angels who protect us from the lizards. And....
(While we're on crazy theories)
UL sucks horribly and half of them were 100% incapable of understanding my device or how it works.
CE certification is superior and the Europeans actually have an education.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but CE is a 'self certified' system. European engineers are perpetually complaining about CE being stamped on anything and everything, with no testing whatsoever, entirely legally and with no enforcement.
I know because I used to do standards compliance (amongst other things) in a previous job at an electronic manufacturer in the UK.
There is this thing called causality. It tends to keep things in chronological order. I know that concepts like "before" and "after" an event are strange to you, but they do make a difference. The math just won't let you swap them around like that unless you're very bad at carrying the signs.
Eh?