First figure out a way to manage 3D video in 360 degrees.. that'll be a tricky one.
I guess it could be done for a single viewer with head/eye tracking...
So, Google web developers, who decide, in their free time, to do a litle something 'fun' should be beaten with a stick and told to just work on the 'serious business' boring old crap?
Or you could look instead at the newer kinds of projectors like this casio one, or a straight LED Projector that don't have bulbs.
They're also a lot lighter and smaller than any TV for the same screen size. They're also much cooler to run.
And aside for the obvious HUD-like qualities, remember you could have an external display on contact lenses. Programmable eye colour, animated eye colour. before long we'll have contacts that make a person's eyes look like marbles of doom, or something even more imaginative. That'd probably work better with e-ink unless you wanted your eyes to also glow in the dark.
I'm against getting sucked into commercial advertising, but after the old spice phenomenom, I've given it some serious thought and decided that I don't mind being sucked in when the advertising has that... Je ne sais quoi... It's not going to happen often by it's own virtue, and that company that can come up with it can have my business, or at least "have me as a tool" to forward their advertising (still never bought any old spice products, and don't plan to)
I wish every advertiserment I happened accross had the same 'Je ne sais quoi' of awesomness.
Well, for one thing, your car, as you said, is modified. For another thing, are you telling me that cars are intended to be used with both brakes and acceleration applied at the same time, that this is not counterintuitive?
As for damaging the car, well, of course it does. as mentioned, every time you apply breaks you are adding wear and tear, simply driving a car wears it out over time. And as thus, cars are designed to minimise this damage, not exacerbate it.
In fact, newer designs hook into the braking to recapture the energy for (later, not simultanious) use in acceleration. You're going to be hard pressed to convince me that it is ever a good idea to both brake and accelerate at the same time.
As for the reaction time gained in seeing the need to slow down, your brain processing this into an automatic reaction and finally the gain by using either your right or left foot to apply pressure to the brake, which is rarely fast, hard, and immediate) I'm thinking that the risk of not easing up fast enough on the accelerator (or forgetting to do so entirely) would make it much worse to use both feet than to using one, and even assuming you did ease off the accelerator just as fast, that (possible) split fraction of a second is of negligable value.
I, instead, factor my reaction time into my driving and ensure I don't need a fraction of a second extra to avoid an accident.
In fact, I prefer a to plan for a large fraction of a second (or even whole seconds) of reaction time for any possible problems, which is why I drive aware of my environment, rather that resting a foot on each pedal and thinking I have it all under control.
I also am wondering why I keep posting replies to this that really deserve to be modded 'redundant', so I'll stop now:)
You drive your way, I'll drive mine, and hopefulyl we'll never cross paths on the open road:)
GL and have fun out there.
I never specifically said you were the typical 2 foot driver.
In fact, from my experience, both you and your vehicle set-up are atypical to what I see.
Then again, I only see the bad drivers, I assume the good drivers are driving as the car was designed to be driven, I could be wrong.
Perhaps everyone else on the road is driving with a foot on each pedal, and most of them are managing to do OK.
I also said "Not because it harms me", not "Because it is unsafe" as it's not really unsafe.
But I am still pretty sure (no car expert, not claiming to be one) that cars are not designed to have gas and brake applied at the same time (which, I believe, is why you are supposed to use one foot for both, to ensure that doesn't happen)
Again, not a car expert. Perhaps cars are suppposed to have both applied simultaniously, and it's just a design flaw with how the pedals are set up.
In any event, I think the 'reaction time' saved by driving with a foot on each pedal is barely significant compared to teh benefits of being aware of your surroundings (Which you did state were beneficial, but seemed to think the 2 offt method was just as important, which is where I strongly disagree).
Being an aware, defensive driver and not driving stupidly (which is seperate to driving aggressively, though not mutually exclusive) is the key to not getting in accidents. Not only accidents of your own fault, but even most accidents that would be someone else's fault.
Hehe, I'm from sydney, moved to Dallas, TX, been here about 8 years, and I still tailgate a little, and all the DFW people I know think my driving is 'reckless'.
However, I've never had an accident where I was at fault.
I think learning to drive in a city like sydney (or, I assume New York, Tokyo, etc) teaches you how to drive both defensively and aggressively, and makes you a far safer driver.
Also, my only accident was when I turned left, and someone ran a red light and clipped me.
I'll admit, though, I consistantly speed about 5m over the limit, and have never been booked for it, something I could never get away with in Sydney.
So far as the guy stating about using one foot for the brake and the other for the accellerator, I hate drivers like that.
As mentioned, key to safe driving is being aware of everything around you, and every time I see a car with brake lights on speed up it grates on my nerves. Not because it harms me just due to the idiocy of it and the damage they're doing to their car.
If cars were ment to be driven with one foot on teh brake and the other on the accellerator (like some race cars) then they'd be designed for it (like those race cars) and not have a foot rest for your left foot, and the pedals to the right a bit.
Then again, I also far prefer manual transmission. I always feel so much more in control.
Harder and harder to get manual these days, however. We're living in the go-cart generation.
Perhaps we should just add 2' rubber bumpers on all the cars and limit the speed to 5mph?
True. However, Australians are legally required to vote, it's not a choice. That is why things are so messed up, because people who don't want to vote, but must vote anyway don't care enough to look into the issues beyone the surface "Stop child porn? I'll vote for that" Instead of realising how deep the policy goes, and how little it ends up having to do with kiddy porn, and how much it impacts everything else.
The system for voting is good, sure, but that doesn't mean people who don't care enough to look at the policies and bother figuring out how to properly vote can abstain:/
I'm Aussie, so please let me correct you on that.
Dear Asshole Australian, I’d rather live in a country with bad city ratings and intelligent voters than in a country with a bad government. Thank you.
That I can agree with, and unfortunately, the voters are in part at fault (and the other part is the forced vote, which means people vote without really wanting to/caring, and voters who don't care don't make informed votes).
But, yeah, that particular Australian is a bit of an arse, and indicitave of the poor voters who got us into this mess to begin with.
In short, please don't judge Aussies as a whole by the rotten apples, most of us are pretty nice laid back folk.
Please don't try to claim that Australia is a wonderful place to live because lack of 15+ computer games lower gun crime, and so forth.
Lowering gun crime was done by sensible laws. It's possible to have both sensible and stupid laws on the same books. Just because some are good doesn't make them all good, no more than the stupid ones making all the laws stupid.
Every country in teh world has some stupid laws as well as good ones (well, I don't have the research for that, but I think it's a fair assumption).
This thread is about trying to prevent a new stupid one, and suggesting some more good ones. i.e. Give out a R18+ or legal 'unrated' rating, not censor the adult population and claim it's for child safety.
To take this kind of lawmaking to it's logical conclusion, Australia would end up banning alcohol, driving, sex, and, um, in the end, voting, as none of these are appropriate for children under 15. And when they get around to banning voting, thats when things will finally stop, for obvious reasons.
So how do you explain shows on public free-to-air television like Chances?
I mean, This whole government censorship crap is stupid and retarded, I'l agree, and I understand very few (if any) informed Aussies want it, that it's just political positioning supported by those 'forced to vote' Aussies who don't bother to do more than scan the headlines and thing 'oh, stop child porn? Sure I'll vote for that' without bothering to learn a little more. Still, Aussies love tits, and have no problems showing them. Otherwise there'd be no more nude beaches in Australia, let alone near major cities.
I'm reminded of a mildly profound part of the first Matrix movie, where Agent Smith is describing to Morpheus how the first attempt of the matrix was intended to have all of the residents happy and carefree, and how the people rejected it, because misery is one of the defining parts of human existence.
While I'm not sure I entirely agree with that, I certainly have come across people who seem to enjoy being upset. People who will dwell on the smallest things, express their anger constantly to anyone within earshot, and take pride in their ability to hold grudges.
For people like this, the fact that modern civilization has basically solved most of their real needs sure is inconvenient. It can't be nearly as fulfilling to complain all day about how close someone parked to their car as it would be to complain about not having enough food to eat. These people need to spend some time in a third world country, and see what real problems look like.
Customer information only 'technically' belongs to the company if it's written in the contract.
If an employer hires a representative, who cultivates a list of clients and uses them to the companys benefit, Then you need to figure out if the company is a) employing someone who can bring them in money through whatever method (gettign contacts to provide custom, in this instance) or if they are hiring a person, and getting contacts themselves, and having the employeee manage the company's contacts.
I think you'll find there are a lot of potential employees who are valued because of their contacts and their possible custom from these contacts,
This is why people who have/can get a lot of contacts are usually the ones who are kept in employment. The ones who don't aren't hired or who can't get them aren't kept on.
Of course, an employee taking a list of the companys contacts, especially when that employee had nothing to do with aquiring said contacts is potentially stealing, but this is not always the case.
Hehe, I used to be almost as elitest as the parent.
I still love Quake though, and I'm glad to see theyre keeping it alive and making it available and accessable to todays youth.
Hopefully this approach will work out for them (It seems reasonable and sounds like it will succeed)
Assuming it does succeed, it will hopefully open the way for future improvement and enhancement.
Perhaps in 5 years we'll have more games like this, where a new game comes out, with cutting edge features, that everyone can play for free, and if they like it, subscribe. No CD's, no hassles.
Yes, there's other possibilities, and to be good at what you do you need to be able to adjust on the fly as circumstances change, and take risks.
3: if they're cute, cool. just use protection.
4: have good reactions, dodge the knife, use their attempted murder to manipulate them instead, or get the hell out.
5: adjust, or strike out. it's like telemarketing, there's a lot of attempts to get a bite sometimes.
6: if you're a good enough player you should be able to detect when you're being played, if not, well, thats that whole risk aspect in play
7: If they ask for a lobster dinner instead of a cup of coffee, and you fall for it, well, you're in teh wrong game.
8: so, nothing lost, nothing gained, move to next mark
9: same as 8
10: same as 7
Of course thre's other possibilities, youjust have to roll with them and keep on trucking. There might be a sucker born every minute, but for every sucker there's a dozen who you won't score on.
I know, it's amusing, but to all the folks posting analogies about this, try out this one:
You're a bank manager, and visit the safe-deposit box room at the end of the day, and see that someone left their saftey deposit box with the key in the lock.
Do you lock up for them, and give them their key? Or leave it as it is for the next dishonest customer in the room that decides to clean them out?
The warning blinking light we have in australia in a few places (Aroun dSydney, at least) although it is more often used for blind crests and the like. This was actually what I thought would be a more economical practical idea when i read the GGP's idea.
Should be cheaper and simpler: if you see the blinking light, slow down and prepare to stop.
The problem is that whatever method is used, there are people who will push the limits. Seeing a countdown or a flashing light or any early warning will just tell them 'speed up' and potentially result in far worse accidents.
Any such 'early warning' system would need to be coupled with speed cameras to punish such behavour.
(Personally, I'd probably fall into the 'step on it' category, myself)
Slashdot Mirror
First figure out a way to manage 3D video in 360 degrees.. that'll be a tricky one.
I guess it could be done for a single viewer with head/eye tracking...
Actually, I looked at how it was done and was impressed by the simplicity and elegance of it.
So, Google web developers, who decide, in their free time, to do a litle something 'fun' should be beaten with a stick and told to just work on the 'serious business' boring old crap?
Or you could look instead at the newer kinds of projectors like this casio one, or a straight LED Projector that don't have bulbs.
They're also a lot lighter and smaller than any TV for the same screen size. They're also much cooler to run.
These would be so much fun to hack. 'popups' are going to be so amusing 50 years from now...
And aside for the obvious HUD-like qualities, remember you could have an external display on contact lenses. Programmable eye colour, animated eye colour. before long we'll have contacts that make a person's eyes look like marbles of doom, or something even more imaginative. That'd probably work better with e-ink unless you wanted your eyes to also glow in the dark.
I'm against getting sucked into commercial advertising, but after the old spice phenomenom, I've given it some serious thought and decided that I don't mind being sucked in when the advertising has that ... Je ne sais quoi... It's not going to happen often by it's own virtue, and that company that can come up with it can have my business, or at least "have me as a tool" to forward their advertising (still never bought any old spice products, and don't plan to)
I wish every advertiserment I happened accross had the same 'Je ne sais quoi' of awesomness.
Well, for one thing, your car, as you said, is modified. For another thing, are you telling me that cars are intended to be used with both brakes and acceleration applied at the same time, that this is not counterintuitive? :) :)
As for damaging the car, well, of course it does. as mentioned, every time you apply breaks you are adding wear and tear, simply driving a car wears it out over time. And as thus, cars are designed to minimise this damage, not exacerbate it.
In fact, newer designs hook into the braking to recapture the energy for (later, not simultanious) use in acceleration. You're going to be hard pressed to convince me that it is ever a good idea to both brake and accelerate at the same time.
As for the reaction time gained in seeing the need to slow down, your brain processing this into an automatic reaction and finally the gain by using either your right or left foot to apply pressure to the brake, which is rarely fast, hard, and immediate) I'm thinking that the risk of not easing up fast enough on the accelerator (or forgetting to do so entirely) would make it much worse to use both feet than to using one, and even assuming you did ease off the accelerator just as fast, that (possible) split fraction of a second is of negligable value.
I, instead, factor my reaction time into my driving and ensure I don't need a fraction of a second extra to avoid an accident.
In fact, I prefer a to plan for a large fraction of a second (or even whole seconds) of reaction time for any possible problems, which is why I drive aware of my environment, rather that resting a foot on each pedal and thinking I have it all under control.
I also am wondering why I keep posting replies to this that really deserve to be modded 'redundant', so I'll stop now
You drive your way, I'll drive mine, and hopefulyl we'll never cross paths on the open road
GL and have fun out there.
I never specifically said you were the typical 2 foot driver.
In fact, from my experience, both you and your vehicle set-up are atypical to what I see.
Then again, I only see the bad drivers, I assume the good drivers are driving as the car was designed to be driven, I could be wrong.
Perhaps everyone else on the road is driving with a foot on each pedal, and most of them are managing to do OK.
I also said "Not because it harms me", not "Because it is unsafe" as it's not really unsafe.
But I am still pretty sure (no car expert, not claiming to be one) that cars are not designed to have gas and brake applied at the same time (which, I believe, is why you are supposed to use one foot for both, to ensure that doesn't happen)
Again, not a car expert. Perhaps cars are suppposed to have both applied simultaniously, and it's just a design flaw with how the pedals are set up.
In any event, I think the 'reaction time' saved by driving with a foot on each pedal is barely significant compared to teh benefits of being aware of your surroundings (Which you did state were beneficial, but seemed to think the 2 offt method was just as important, which is where I strongly disagree).
Being an aware, defensive driver and not driving stupidly (which is seperate to driving aggressively, though not mutually exclusive) is the key to not getting in accidents. Not only accidents of your own fault, but even most accidents that would be someone else's fault.
Hehe, I'm from sydney, moved to Dallas, TX, been here about 8 years, and I still tailgate a little, and all the DFW people I know think my driving is 'reckless'.
However, I've never had an accident where I was at fault. I think learning to drive in a city like sydney (or, I assume New York, Tokyo, etc) teaches you how to drive both defensively and aggressively, and makes you a far safer driver. Also, my only accident was when I turned left, and someone ran a red light and clipped me.
I'll admit, though, I consistantly speed about 5m over the limit, and have never been booked for it, something I could never get away with in Sydney.
So far as the guy stating about using one foot for the brake and the other for the accellerator, I hate drivers like that.
As mentioned, key to safe driving is being aware of everything around you, and every time I see a car with brake lights on speed up it grates on my nerves. Not because it harms me just due to the idiocy of it and the damage they're doing to their car.
If cars were ment to be driven with one foot on teh brake and the other on the accellerator (like some race cars) then they'd be designed for it (like those race cars) and not have a foot rest for your left foot, and the pedals to the right a bit.
Then again, I also far prefer manual transmission. I always feel so much more in control.
Harder and harder to get manual these days, however. We're living in the go-cart generation.
Perhaps we should just add 2' rubber bumpers on all the cars and limit the speed to 5mph?
And I guess that means there is still the possibility they'll find a way to make them viable for the consumer market.
True. However, Australians are legally required to vote, it's not a choice. That is why things are so messed up, because people who don't want to vote, but must vote anyway don't care enough to look into the issues beyone the surface "Stop child porn? I'll vote for that" Instead of realising how deep the policy goes, and how little it ends up having to do with kiddy porn, and how much it impacts everything else. :/
The system for voting is good, sure, but that doesn't mean people who don't care enough to look at the policies and bother figuring out how to properly vote can abstain
I'm Aussie, so please let me correct you on that.
Dear Asshole Australian, I’d rather live in a country with bad city ratings and intelligent voters than in a country with a bad government. Thank you.
That I can agree with, and unfortunately, the voters are in part at fault (and the other part is the forced vote, which means people vote without really wanting to/caring, and voters who don't care don't make informed votes).
But, yeah, that particular Australian is a bit of an arse, and indicitave of the poor voters who got us into this mess to begin with.
In short, please don't judge Aussies as a whole by the rotten apples, most of us are pretty nice laid back folk.
Please don't try to claim that Australia is a wonderful place to live because lack of 15+ computer games lower gun crime, and so forth.
Lowering gun crime was done by sensible laws. It's possible to have both sensible and stupid laws on the same books. Just because some are good doesn't make them all good, no more than the stupid ones making all the laws stupid.
Every country in teh world has some stupid laws as well as good ones (well, I don't have the research for that, but I think it's a fair assumption).
This thread is about trying to prevent a new stupid one, and suggesting some more good ones. i.e. Give out a R18+ or legal 'unrated' rating, not censor the adult population and claim it's for child safety.
To take this kind of lawmaking to it's logical conclusion, Australia would end up banning alcohol, driving, sex, and, um, in the end, voting, as none of these are appropriate for children under 15. And when they get around to banning voting, thats when things will finally stop, for obvious reasons.
So how do you explain shows on public free-to-air television like Chances?
I mean, This whole government censorship crap is stupid and retarded, I'l agree, and I understand very few (if any) informed Aussies want it, that it's just political positioning supported by those 'forced to vote' Aussies who don't bother to do more than scan the headlines and thing 'oh, stop child porn? Sure I'll vote for that' without bothering to learn a little more. Still, Aussies love tits, and have no problems showing them. Otherwise there'd be no more nude beaches in Australia, let alone near major cities.
I'm reminded of a mildly profound part of the first Matrix movie, where Agent Smith is describing to Morpheus how the first attempt of the matrix was intended to have all of the residents happy and carefree, and how the people rejected it, because misery is one of the defining parts of human existence.
While I'm not sure I entirely agree with that, I certainly have come across people who seem to enjoy being upset. People who will dwell on the smallest things, express their anger constantly to anyone within earshot, and take pride in their ability to hold grudges.
For people like this, the fact that modern civilization has basically solved most of their real needs sure is inconvenient. It can't be nearly as fulfilling to complain all day about how close someone parked to their car as it would be to complain about not having enough food to eat. These people need to spend some time in a third world country, and see what real problems look like.
I see you've met my wife.
Customer information only 'technically' belongs to the company if it's written in the contract.
If an employer hires a representative, who cultivates a list of clients and uses them to the companys benefit, Then you need to figure out if the company is a) employing someone who can bring them in money through whatever method (gettign contacts to provide custom, in this instance) or if they are hiring a person, and getting contacts themselves, and having the employeee manage the company's contacts.
I think you'll find there are a lot of potential employees who are valued because of their contacts and their possible custom from these contacts,
This is why people who have/can get a lot of contacts are usually the ones who are kept in employment. The ones who don't aren't hired or who can't get them aren't kept on.
Of course, an employee taking a list of the companys contacts, especially when that employee had nothing to do with aquiring said contacts is potentially stealing, but this is not always the case.
Hehe, I used to be almost as elitest as the parent.
I still love Quake though, and I'm glad to see theyre keeping it alive and making it available and accessable to todays youth.
Hopefully this approach will work out for them (It seems reasonable and sounds like it will succeed)
Assuming it does succeed, it will hopefully open the way for future improvement and enhancement.
Perhaps in 5 years we'll have more games like this, where a new game comes out, with cutting edge features, that everyone can play for free, and if they like it, subscribe. No CD's, no hassles.
Nepenthes ?!? wouldn't there be risk of spilt liquid? or how .. um.. this is a little boggling. More detail please?
Thats why it was only an analogy, and far better, I thought, that most of the other ones.
And you don't have the same expectation of your ISP to keep your internet connection safe and secure?
Yes, there's other possibilities, and to be good at what you do you need to be able to adjust on the fly as circumstances change, and take risks.
3: if they're cute, cool. just use protection.
4: have good reactions, dodge the knife, use their attempted murder to manipulate them instead, or get the hell out.
5: adjust, or strike out. it's like telemarketing, there's a lot of attempts to get a bite sometimes.
6: if you're a good enough player you should be able to detect when you're being played, if not, well, thats that whole risk aspect in play
7: If they ask for a lobster dinner instead of a cup of coffee, and you fall for it, well, you're in teh wrong game.
8: so, nothing lost, nothing gained, move to next mark
9: same as 8
10: same as 7
Of course thre's other possibilities, youjust have to roll with them and keep on trucking. There might be a sucker born every minute, but for every sucker there's a dozen who you won't score on.
I know, it's amusing, but to all the folks posting analogies about this, try out this one:
You're a bank manager, and visit the safe-deposit box room at the end of the day, and see that someone left their saftey deposit box with the key in the lock.
Do you lock up for them, and give them their key? Or leave it as it is for the next dishonest customer in the room that decides to clean them out?
Bloody lazy folks: Roundabout Studies
The warning blinking light we have in australia in a few places (Aroun dSydney, at least) although it is more often used for blind crests and the like. This was actually what I thought would be a more economical practical idea when i read the GGP's idea.
Should be cheaper and simpler: if you see the blinking light, slow down and prepare to stop.
The problem is that whatever method is used, there are people who will push the limits. Seeing a countdown or a flashing light or any early warning will just tell them 'speed up' and potentially result in far worse accidents.
Any such 'early warning' system would need to be coupled with speed cameras to punish such behavour.
(Personally, I'd probably fall into the 'step on it' category, myself)