Maemo mapper on the Nokia allows the download of maps before hand and will store them. I've used it and it works fine. You can store the entire US if you have enough memory.
While I agree with your thoughts about not need the cell phone when you are out driving, walking, shopping etc... I do have a cell phone, dumb as a brick. This is because the landline that I had was more expensive and it was of shitty quality. So, for me it was kill the land line and just get a cell phone. Most of the time, it's sitting on the table at home while I am out having fun. I suppose that it gets lonely at home all by itself, but I don't really care.
Woo hoo! Someone with a little sense. I had an old Palm treo 850. Nice phone. Had it for years and never used the data end of it. It finally died a few months ago. I ended up buying a Sonim XP3300 because I don't need or want the 'smart' aspect. I just want a phone that I can beat the shit out of, but it will still work. While the Sonim has the capability of web, GPS and other things, I don't consider it smart by any means. I could best describe it as a smart phone that has had a lobotomy.
Never happens in a car? What planet are you from? All of my passengers have shown very good judgement when in my car - THEY handle the radio. THEY answer MY cell phone if needed. THEY do keep an eye out for potential problems, etc... That is the way it should be done. I know many others who operate the same way. So, yes passengers can and do act as copilots. If your passengers do less, they are idiots. I guess that this is a case where proper TRAINING clearly is the better way to go. Like I said, getting a drivers license should be much more difficult and costly.
As for the other distractions, it's very simple. Don't look for a napkin - the kid (and the back seat) can stay wet. Don't monitor the sproggs in the back seat as much - use common sense and a bit of self control. If they get into fights, tell them to stop and then give them a thrashing when you get home. If you have another adult passenger, they can sort it out. And it's no shame to pull over to do if yourself if you must. I got no problem with holding hands. Anything more in a moving vehicle is probably a bad idea..
However, I have also read some pretty funny (and fatal) aviation reports of people doing stupid things in aircraft. (Yes, some people really do try to have sex in general aviation aircraft. So even succeed to NOT kill themselves, some are less lucky)
What I an trying to say is that there seems to be a complete and utter lack of common sense while driving (and flying).
The difference between driving while having a conversation on the phone and driving while having a conversation with a passenger is simple:
On the phone the other side of the conversation has no clue about your situation and can not help you in visual scanning of the driving environment. However, if the other side of the conversation is riding in the car with you, at least they can say 'Hey! Look out for that elephant in the road!'. Hopefully before you hit it. They can also help you with keeping the radio sorted out, navigation and collecting that cassette that was dropped. In aviation terms, it called cockpit load management - and it really works.
Even when going 'hands free' a lot of your processing is taken up with sorting out the conversation. Saying otherwise is simply not true.
I do agree that bored or tired drivers are dangerous drivers. Sadly, the overwhelming majority of the drivers out there are quite simply dumb as a fucking box of rocks and should not be driving. It's way too easy to get a drivers license. Driving is a PRIVILEGE people, NOT a right. You have the RIGHT to APPLY for a license, it should not mean that you would automatically get one. The penalties for getting involved in a traffic collision should be pretty stiff, including fines, compulsory remedial driving classes and the suspension and / or loss of driving privileges. And none of this 'no-fault' crap from the insurance companies. The list for so-called 'no fault' incidents is really pretty short and are basically down to 'acts of god' - tree falling on you, hitting a deer or detritus kicked up from a car in an adjoining lane. Everything else is pretty much avoidable - someone was at fault.
Did Aptera destroy vehicles during the shutdown? Yes. However, the press has made it to sounds like it was employees going mad at being sacked. Not true. I can quote from the Aptera news letter that I received earlier this morning:
The bodies in question were not slated for demolition because on any ill will or malice from any member of the company present or past. These particular 2e's were defective and/or obsolete development properties that no longer had any value to the company. We destroyed the bodies because they were unsafe for use as a vehicle -- with high potential for loss of life if they were involved in a crash. (This is evidenced by the upper body and lower skins separating from each other on impact.)
While the company often engages in technology sharing with academic institutions (area elementary, middle and high schools, universities and museums, we never released vehicle assets that had the potential of being misused and resulting in physical harm or loss of life.
Contrary to the stories that have been written recently, there was no destruction of company property during the closure of Aptera. It is appalling how low journalism in the internet age has sunk in pursuit of sensationalism. In fact, our employees exited the building honorably and professionally. The accusations that have been made to the contrary are insulting and demonstrate the kind of uninformed defamation that diminishes the all of Aptera's efforts and undermines the work of everybody committed to perpetuating clean transportation.
Finally, there are currently seven prototypes of the Aptera 2e concept inside our former headquarters in Carlsbad, Calif. These prototypes reflect every generation of Aptera vehicle body ever created, from the very first tested concept vehicle (built by the founders) to the most recent prototype that was campaigned at the Automotive XPRIZE. An eighth prototype resides at the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago. Incidentally, none of these vehicles have been damaged in anyway.
Fucking journalists. Always trying to make it out to be more than what it really is.
Not so. For a battery to start a fire (your words), it need not be punctured. All you need to do is draw more current than the wiring is capable of carrying. Wires heat up, and then you get a fire. However, if you discharge the battery at a rate greater than the battery is designed for it is possible that it may explode or catch fire. Generally they just swell up.
And you do not always get a fireball when you puncture a gasoline take either - an ignition source MUST be present to ignite gas.
Indeed I do. I think that it would be great to have fewer wires lurking about and having the perceived simplicity of wireless. Over the years, I have tried several wireless keyboards, from various manufacturers. Not one has ever made the cut. Finally, in great despair I went back to wired keyboards.
But in the end, while a wireless connection may be *preferred*, I suspect that it almost never required.
No, the biggest question is that: 'Will they air the accident sequence and the resulting damage'? I REALLY think that they should, it is a good lesson as to why you do not try this stuff at home.
Most older cars are built to LAST. Face it, they are designed to be disposable - when it breaks, throw it away and buy a new one.
Crumbs, I just noticed an error in this line. I MEANT to Say: Older cars are built to last. NEW cars are designed to be disposable. (Just like every other new consumer product. This really pisses me off!)
Actually, it was a very good looking vehicle. Face it, modern cars generally lack any sort of style and nothing differentiates them from the one another. The toyota looks like a honda looks like ford looks like chevy looks like volkswagon looks like bmw, etc... At one point subaru looked okay, but they have lost their imagination as well. Sure, if you can afford an Aston Martin, then okay. But all the really good looking designs are way more than 30 years old. Modern cars look like crap, and while they may be more reliable they are much more expensive to repair when something does go wrong.
Most older cars are built to LAST. Face it, they are designed to be disposable - when it breaks, throw it away and buy a new one. Yeah, what a way to save money. My Land Cruiser is 40 years old and is nearly 100% steel by weight. The transfer case and transmission housing are aluminum and there is a bit of plastic and foam in the dash panels and seats. That makes my older car a lot less expensive to recycle at the end of its useful life than *any* modern car.
And do not underestimate the power of the Dark Side.... Err.. The Force... Errr. Composite body shells (with metal reinforcement). I digress. There are many (okay a few) cars out there with composite or 'plastic' bodies, with perhaps the best known being Corvette. It has had a fiberglass body throughout most of its production run. Saturn used plastic body panels until about '07 or so. The Smart car has used plastic panels through out it's production. Face it Buckwheat, as the need to reduce curb weight increases, composite and plastic body panels are going to be a big part of cars in the future.
Sure it may not have been designed for the general unwashed masses of people (who are mostly wastes of skin and can not drive and should not even have licenses).
It was way better than the Corbin Sparrow, with a longer range. And while it may have suffered *silghtly* in the stability area, it is no where near what you suggest. I have driven many three wheeled cars including the Aptera. If you put the single wheel in front (like the Zap), then yes, it will have problems. But that issue was largely solved in the Carver design, it was very stable. If you put the single wheel in the rear like the Aptera, the Epic Torque and a few others, stability is really mot much of problem at all. It's really more about how well balanced the weight is distributed and how low you can get the center of gravity.
I have also noted that while concept cars generally are nicely styled, by the time (if) they make it to market they look nothing like the original concept. The Aptera was a good looking car, certainly 'not built like a handicapped car' as you suggest. It actually was a little difficult to get in and out of if you were over 6' tall.
In these here parts, if I pay a toll with cash at a tool booth they take a photo of the front of my car. This shows both the front plate and the driver. Not tracking? Yeah, right.
However, the solution to the problem of the camera is simple. Turn the transponder around so that the camera is pointed forward. The only picture that they will get is the view through the front windscreen.
Okaaaaaay. I hate to break it to you guys, but passive and active magnetic shielding has been around for a long time now. This is simply a new spin on old tech, adapting it and slightly enhancing it.
Shielding an object from external fields is not difficult provided you have money to spend. Hospitals do it all the time for their MRI suites. The shielding may be either passive (LOTS of steel plates in the floor, walls and ceiling), or actively by installing 3-axis helmholtz coils in the walls, floor and ceiling. The coils are then driven by a set of very large and fast amplifiers. The amplifiers are driven by correction signal from a computer that has at least one 3-axis magnetometer. Obviously, the active solution is better as it can correct for things like elevators, automobiles and other things that influence the local magnetic field. The passive shielding is only good is the external field does not change.
I remember one such shielding job in San Francisco that gave trouble because of the volume of *WATER* flow in the city water main running under the MRI suite. Yes, even water can affect magnetic fields. Passive shielding would not work, so the site had to switch to the more expensive active shielding.
I also have had trouble calibrating magnetic instrumentation because of cars in the car park moving around. I'd have to wait for a window where there was no activity outside the building. I'm talking about smallish cars more than 50' away, and large trucks could change the fields from more than 100' away...
As a pilot, I have read a *lot* of NTSB reports. It's a good way to keep yourself aware of the dangers that can crop up whilst flying. Most of the reports are pretty dull, and not always very enlightening. This one may be better than most because it was so public.
Most of the reports that I have read are generally stupid things like running out of fuel or flying into poor weather conditions.
Slashdot Mirror
Maemo mapper on the Nokia allows the download of maps before hand and will store them. I've used it and it works fine. You can store the entire US if you have enough memory.
While I agree with your thoughts about not need the cell phone when you are out driving, walking, shopping etc... I do have a cell phone, dumb as a brick. This is because the landline that I had was more expensive and it was of shitty quality. So, for me it was kill the land line and just get a cell phone. Most of the time, it's sitting on the table at home while I am out having fun. I suppose that it gets lonely at home all by itself, but I don't really care.
Woo hoo! Someone with a little sense. I had an old Palm treo 850. Nice phone. Had it for years and never used the data end of it. It finally died a few months ago. I ended up buying a Sonim XP3300 because I don't need or want the 'smart' aspect. I just want a phone that I can beat the shit out of, but it will still work. While the Sonim has the capability of web, GPS and other things, I don't consider it smart by any means. I could best describe it as a smart phone that has had a lobotomy.
Because if poor drivers were targeted, nobody would be allowed to drive.
Never happens in a car? What planet are you from? All of my passengers have shown very good judgement when in my car - THEY handle the radio. THEY answer MY cell phone if needed. THEY do keep an eye out for potential problems, etc... That is the way it should be done. I know many others who operate the same way. So, yes passengers can and do act as copilots. If your passengers do less, they are idiots. I guess that this is a case where proper TRAINING clearly is the better way to go. Like I said, getting a drivers license should be much more difficult and costly.
As for the other distractions, it's very simple. Don't look for a napkin - the kid (and the back seat) can stay wet. Don't monitor the sproggs in the back seat as much - use common sense and a bit of self control. If they get into fights, tell them to stop and then give them a thrashing when you get home. If you have another adult passenger, they can sort it out. And it's no shame to pull over to do if yourself if you must. I got no problem with holding hands. Anything more in a moving vehicle is probably a bad idea..
However, I have also read some pretty funny (and fatal) aviation reports of people doing stupid things in aircraft. (Yes, some people really do try to have sex in general aviation aircraft. So even succeed to NOT kill themselves, some are less lucky)
What I an trying to say is that there seems to be a complete and utter lack of common sense while driving (and flying).
The difference between driving while having a conversation on the phone and driving while having a conversation with a passenger is simple:
On the phone the other side of the conversation has no clue about your situation and can not help you in visual scanning of the driving environment. However, if the other side of the conversation is riding in the car with you, at least they can say 'Hey! Look out for that elephant in the road!'. Hopefully before you hit it. They can also help you with keeping the radio sorted out, navigation and collecting that cassette that was dropped. In aviation terms, it called cockpit load management - and it really works.
Even when going 'hands free' a lot of your processing is taken up with sorting out the conversation. Saying otherwise is simply not true.
I do agree that bored or tired drivers are dangerous drivers. Sadly, the overwhelming majority of the drivers out there are quite simply dumb as a fucking box of rocks and should not be driving. It's way too easy to get a drivers license. Driving is a PRIVILEGE people, NOT a right. You have the RIGHT to APPLY for a license, it should not mean that you would automatically get one. The penalties for getting involved in a traffic collision should be pretty stiff, including fines, compulsory remedial driving classes and the suspension and / or loss of driving privileges. And none of this 'no-fault' crap from the insurance companies. The list for so-called 'no fault' incidents is really pretty short and are basically down to 'acts of god' - tree falling on you, hitting a deer or detritus kicked up from a car in an adjoining lane. Everything else is pretty much avoidable - someone was at fault.
Did Aptera destroy vehicles during the shutdown? Yes. However, the press has made it to sounds like it was employees going mad at being sacked. Not true. I can quote from the Aptera news letter that I received earlier this morning:
The bodies in question were not slated for demolition because on any ill will or malice from any member of the company present or past. These particular 2e's were defective and/or obsolete development properties that no longer had any value to the company. We destroyed the bodies because they were unsafe for use as a vehicle -- with high potential for loss of life if they were involved in a crash. (This is evidenced by the upper body and lower skins separating from each other on impact.)
While the company often engages in technology sharing with academic institutions (area elementary, middle and high schools, universities and museums, we never released vehicle assets that had the potential of being misused and resulting in physical harm or loss of life.
Contrary to the stories that have been written recently, there was no destruction of company property during the closure of Aptera. It is appalling how low journalism in the internet age has sunk in pursuit of sensationalism. In fact, our employees exited the building honorably and professionally. The accusations that have been made to the contrary are insulting and demonstrate the kind of uninformed defamation that diminishes the all of Aptera's efforts and undermines the work of everybody committed to perpetuating clean transportation.
Finally, there are currently seven prototypes of the Aptera 2e concept inside our former headquarters in Carlsbad, Calif. These prototypes reflect every generation of Aptera vehicle body ever created, from the very first tested concept vehicle (built by the founders) to the most recent prototype that was campaigned at the Automotive XPRIZE. An eighth prototype resides at the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago. Incidentally, none of these vehicles have been damaged in anyway.
Fucking journalists. Always trying to make it out to be more than what it really is.
Yeah, but with a little work they can. AND, they will still be more economical. Also a hell of a lot more reliable.
Not so. For a battery to start a fire (your words), it need not be punctured. All you need to do is draw more current than the wiring is capable of carrying. Wires heat up, and then you get a fire. However, if you discharge the battery at a rate greater than the battery is designed for it is possible that it may explode or catch fire. Generally they just swell up.
And you do not always get a fireball when you puncture a gasoline take either - an ignition source MUST be present to ignite gas.
Oh fuck off, you pussy.
Indeed I do. I think that it would be great to have fewer wires lurking about and having the perceived simplicity of wireless. Over the years, I have tried several wireless keyboards, from various manufacturers. Not one has ever made the cut. Finally, in great despair I went back to wired keyboards.
But in the end, while a wireless connection may be *preferred*, I suspect that it almost never required.
Why not put wires on the key board (perhaps even a USB connection), and the battery is not even needed. Wow.
No, the biggest question is that: 'Will they air the accident sequence and the resulting damage'? I REALLY think that they should, it is a good lesson as to why you do not try this stuff at home.
Most older cars are built to LAST. Face it, they are designed to be disposable - when it breaks, throw it away and buy a new one.
Crumbs, I just noticed an error in this line. I MEANT to Say: Older cars are built to last. NEW cars are designed to be disposable. (Just like every other new consumer product. This really pisses me off!)
Actually, it was a very good looking vehicle. Face it, modern cars generally lack any sort of style and nothing differentiates them from the one another. The toyota looks like a honda looks like ford looks like chevy looks like volkswagon looks like bmw, etc... At one point subaru looked okay, but they have lost their imagination as well. Sure, if you can afford an Aston Martin, then okay. But all the really good looking designs are way more than 30 years old. Modern cars look like crap, and while they may be more reliable they are much more expensive to repair when something does go wrong.
Most older cars are built to LAST. Face it, they are designed to be disposable - when it breaks, throw it away and buy a new one. Yeah, what a way to save money. My Land Cruiser is 40 years old and is nearly 100% steel by weight. The transfer case and transmission housing are aluminum and there is a bit of plastic and foam in the dash panels and seats. That makes my older car a lot less expensive to recycle at the end of its useful life than *any* modern car.
And do not underestimate the power of the Dark Side.... Err.. The Force... Errr. Composite body shells (with metal reinforcement). I digress. There are many (okay a few) cars out there with composite or 'plastic' bodies, with perhaps the best known being Corvette. It has had a fiberglass body throughout most of its production run. Saturn used plastic body panels until about '07 or so. The Smart car has used plastic panels through out it's production. Face it Buckwheat, as the need to reduce curb weight increases, composite and plastic body panels are going to be a big part of cars in the future.
Sure it may not have been designed for the general unwashed masses of people (who are mostly wastes of skin and can not drive and should not even have licenses).
It was way better than the Corbin Sparrow, with a longer range. And while it may have suffered *silghtly* in the stability area, it is no where near what you suggest. I have driven many three wheeled cars including the Aptera. If you put the single wheel in front (like the Zap), then yes, it will have problems. But that issue was largely solved in the Carver design, it was very stable. If you put the single wheel in the rear like the Aptera, the Epic Torque and a few others, stability is really mot much of problem at all. It's really more about how well balanced the weight is distributed and how low you can get the center of gravity.
I have also noted that while concept cars generally are nicely styled, by the time (if) they make it to market they look nothing like the original concept. The Aptera was a good looking car, certainly 'not built like a handicapped car' as you suggest. It actually was a little difficult to get in and out of if you were over 6' tall.
Fuck PETA and the horse they rode in on!!!!
Pen and paper baby!
No batteries. Use whatever type of input device you want.
Google flying over China to get high resolution images? I doubt that very much.
Not My car. 1972 Diesel with no electronics to speak of.
Yeah, but a digital version is coming.
In these here parts, if I pay a toll with cash at a tool booth they take a photo of the front of my car. This shows both the front plate and the driver. Not tracking? Yeah, right.
However, the solution to the problem of the camera is simple. Turn the transponder around so that the camera is pointed forward. The only picture that they will get is the view through the front windscreen.
MRI suites are already shielded.
And no, you can not shield the specific volume (inside the magnet) to be imaged.
Okaaaaaay. I hate to break it to you guys, but passive and active magnetic shielding has been around for a long time now. This is simply a new spin on old tech, adapting it and slightly enhancing it.
Shielding an object from external fields is not difficult provided you have money to spend. Hospitals do it all the time for their MRI suites. The shielding may be either passive (LOTS of steel plates in the floor, walls and ceiling), or actively by installing 3-axis helmholtz coils in the walls, floor and ceiling. The coils are then driven by a set of very large and fast amplifiers. The amplifiers are driven by correction signal from a computer that has at least one 3-axis magnetometer. Obviously, the active solution is better as it can correct for things like elevators, automobiles and other things that influence the local magnetic field. The passive shielding is only good is the external field does not change.
I remember one such shielding job in San Francisco that gave trouble because of the volume of *WATER* flow in the city water main running under the MRI suite. Yes, even water can affect magnetic fields. Passive shielding would not work, so the site had to switch to the more expensive active shielding.
I also have had trouble calibrating magnetic instrumentation because of cars in the car park moving around. I'd have to wait for a window where there was no activity outside the building. I'm talking about smallish cars more than 50' away, and large trucks could change the fields from more than 100' away...
The extra charge is placed into an escrow account and is then divided up to help pay for much needed social services.
As a pilot, I have read a *lot* of NTSB reports. It's a good way to keep yourself aware of the dangers that can crop up whilst flying. Most of the reports are pretty dull, and not always very enlightening. This one may be better than most because it was so public.
Most of the reports that I have read are generally stupid things like running out of fuel or flying into poor weather conditions.
Taking off is optional. Landing is not.