Virtually every accident I have witnessed that was clear caused serious property damange, injury and death (seen a few of those, unfortunately)... nearly 100% of those, if not 100% were people trying to swerve around slower or stopped traffic.
Why is that? People in the US are not taught how to control a car, they are only taught how to interact with other cars on the road. Watch someone who is a professional or amateur race driver (who understands vehicle dynamics at the limit) in those situations -- they react totally differently. Threshold brake, keep the ABS from engaging, and stay in a straight line. If you can't scrub the speed to the point where the impact will be a non-event (5mph), you were following WAY WAY too closely. Better to hit the car softly than risk oversteering into it, or worse understeering off the road or into another traffic lane. Once a car starts to lose traction, it takes a very skilled driver to make it go where they want it to.
If you don't know the reasons going 100mph is unsafe for most drivers no matter what the road conditions, you're not in the "knowledgable driver" camp. 100mph is dangerous in any situation in 99% of the cars on the road. Its not how the car and driver can handle expected situations, its how that car and driver can handle an unexpected one. In virtually every case, at 100mph they can't.
Two speed limits isn't the answer. Requiring something more than ten hours of on the road driving and 30 hours of classroom time is the answer. Require limited traction training the way many european countries do. Or maybe just even mention the concept of a traction cirle to young drivers and explain why their lives may depend on them understanding it. A properly trained driver can be in just as much control of a car with four wheel sliding as a badly trained driver on dry pavement.
The important thing to take from that...
on
Gates on Google
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Smart companies do their strategic hiring under the radar... they don't post for them.
Thats an important thing that engineers and architect type people need to understand as they move up the ranks in a company -- you reach a point where the best companies to work don't advertise the positions you want.
What that means is you better be focusing on networking and getting the right contacts, because you won't find the job you want listed in a corporate website or on Monster.
Are you saying the average person will spend $10 on something they could spend $7 on once they're making some arbitrary income?
I don't think thats even remotely the case. In fact, the whole idea is rediculous.
People want to pay less because you can buy more with the money you have, people don't want to pay less because they're making less.
Next time you get a 10% raise, be nice to all the stores you shop at and offer to pay them 10% over their stickered price... after all you're making more money, you should be happy paying more.
Now sure/. is a pretty myopic forum for these sort of discussions, and many people probably don't know anyone who watches, say, sports... but the HUGE increase in sales of HD sets in the last two years isn't because of a sudden rise in the number of geeks. Its due to a sudden rise in availability of signals, and the fact that anyone with better than 20/200 vision can clearly see and appreciate the difference in the sports and TV shows they watch.
The problem is not their motivation for hiring those brilliant people, the problem is the iron lock they've got around their hiring process that prevents those people from hiring their kind of employees.
MS's hiring practices are designed to continue hiring the status quo there. They tend to get very technically strong engineers with a lot less vision. The only way around that is through their strategic hiring program through the office of the CEO, which engineer grunts don't get hired through.
I've had a few very interesting conversations with one of their very high up architects there about that problem. He was ready to snap it drove him so nuts.
The Apollo test (renamed Apollo 1, it was *not* a "mission", just a test) wasn't going to end the program -- the program was a cold war move. It would've taken a lot more than anything NASA wanted to do to stop it at that point. The Soviets getting to the moon is probably the only thing that would've stopped it.
The HST repair was a bold move, but it was well designed technology, and there were a lot of engineers familiar with similar platforms from the construction and design of the Keyhole satellites. While bold, there was good reason to fix it.
The shuttle program has been a blundering mistake since day one. The tragedy happened in the early 70's when the decision was made to pursue it.
They still haven't recovered from THAT one. And they still haven't recovered from Challanger, almost 15 years ago. (Shuttle flights used to be FAR more commonplace before it). The shuttle program was a failure before Challanger when NASA couldn't meet the launch rates they'd promised. It was dead the day they stopped launching for two years after Challanger.
You laugh but I'm sure I'm not the only person on/. old enough to remember the media "frenzy" around the decision to rename Revenge of the Jedi to Return of the Jedi, even though you young whippersnappers probably have read all about it.
The appropriateness of "Revenge" used in a PG movie was a big part of it.
I was in first grade at the time, and clearly remember talking about it on the playground. "F$#% that" I think is what I said...
Its trivial to get detailed information on the person who registered a car given just their license plate. Know anyone who works at an insurance company? They can get it. Bank? Yup, them too. There are also pleanty of companies you can get the information from for $10 to $20, if you don't.
It doesn't require access to "police computers" or "police cooperation". They'll call the police because thats how laws are enforced. But if you piss the wrong person off on the highway, you may find out the hard way how easy it is to get the information.
I've known several people, first hand, who had that happen. Its even easier if the car is decked out with SCCA numbers and sponsor decals.
Its a *big* deal getting licensed by any of those organizations.
Safety inspections are similar. The inspections I have to have on my car to get on a track are FAR more detailed than a state inspection... getting my inspection sticker from the state is easy -- drive up, the wrench at the inspection station takes one look at the car, and asks me to drive it into the bay for him, checks the lights and gives me my sticker.
What race organization doesn't have strict licensing and certification requirements?
I can't think of one. SCCA certainly does, as does PCA and all the other club-level organizations I know of. FIA certainly does. NASCAR does. I don't know, but I have to assume CART does as well.
Seriously... car racing is probably one of the most strictly restricted sports out there... not only do you need the appropriate credentials, you have to meet minimum race requirements to keep your certification.
They have a total monopoly in the professional image editing marketspace. There are no other products. Gimp (which I prefer in many cases) can't do half of the things a professional graphic artist needs, plus the UI is too different to efficiently switch. And when looking at photo editing, I havent' seen ANY product that has good RAW support other than Photoshop (and its support is mediocre at best).
Slashdot Mirror
I watched it a few weeks ago on DVD.
Can't be that bad if 26 years later I'm still watching it.
Might be blasphemy around here, but I think its as good or better than another sci-fi movie that came out around that time...
Best. Slashdot. Post. Evar!
Virtually every accident I have witnessed that was clear caused serious property damange, injury and death (seen a few of those, unfortunately)... nearly 100% of those, if not 100% were people trying to swerve around slower or stopped traffic.
Why is that? People in the US are not taught how to control a car, they are only taught how to interact with other cars on the road. Watch someone who is a professional or amateur race driver (who understands vehicle dynamics at the limit) in those situations -- they react totally differently. Threshold brake, keep the ABS from engaging, and stay in a straight line. If you can't scrub the speed to the point where the impact will be a non-event (5mph), you were following WAY WAY too closely. Better to hit the car softly than risk oversteering into it, or worse understeering off the road or into another traffic lane. Once a car starts to lose traction, it takes a very skilled driver to make it go where they want it to.
If you don't know the reasons going 100mph is unsafe for most drivers no matter what the road conditions, you're not in the "knowledgable driver" camp. 100mph is dangerous in any situation in 99% of the cars on the road. Its not how the car and driver can handle expected situations, its how that car and driver can handle an unexpected one. In virtually every case, at 100mph they can't.
Two speed limits isn't the answer. Requiring something more than ten hours of on the road driving and 30 hours of classroom time is the answer. Require limited traction training the way many european countries do. Or maybe just even mention the concept of a traction cirle to young drivers and explain why their lives may depend on them understanding it. A properly trained driver can be in just as much control of a car with four wheel sliding as a badly trained driver on dry pavement.
Smart companies do their strategic hiring under the radar... they don't post for them.
Thats an important thing that engineers and architect type people need to understand as they move up the ranks in a company -- you reach a point where the best companies to work don't advertise the positions you want.
What that means is you better be focusing on networking and getting the right contacts, because you won't find the job you want listed in a corporate website or on Monster.
Thats an awfully cultured reference for /.
Stick to Userfriendly and penguin references, please.
Are you saying the average person will spend $10 on something they could spend $7 on once they're making some arbitrary income?
I don't think thats even remotely the case. In fact, the whole idea is rediculous.
People want to pay less because you can buy more with the money you have, people don't want to pay less because they're making less.
Next time you get a 10% raise, be nice to all the stores you shop at and offer to pay them 10% over their stickered price... after all you're making more money, you should be happy paying more.
Just do it. Everyone else is.
It'll make you feel better.
People posting last nights TV show were already a criminal.
Duh.
Yeah, and some might argue the quality of Slashdot followed a similar pattern ;-)
The point is the original author's possession of the code isn't under the GPL. It doesn't apply to the copyright holder.
Now sure /. is a pretty myopic forum for these sort of discussions, and many people probably don't know anyone who watches, say, sports... but the HUGE increase in sales of HD sets in the last two years isn't because of a sudden rise in the number of geeks. Its due to a sudden rise in availability of signals, and the fact that anyone with better than 20/200 vision can clearly see and appreciate the difference in the sports and TV shows they watch.
If you're slowed down, you'd perceive moving through space in fast-mo, not slow-mo.
Imagine a beowulf cluster of those!
Can you cluster the external Linux box with the internal one?
And thats why you're a sys-admin and not a photographer.
The photographers would tell you the exact opposite.
The problem is not their motivation for hiring those brilliant people, the problem is the iron lock they've got around their hiring process that prevents those people from hiring their kind of employees.
MS's hiring practices are designed to continue hiring the status quo there. They tend to get very technically strong engineers with a lot less vision. The only way around that is through their strategic hiring program through the office of the CEO, which engineer grunts don't get hired through.
I've had a few very interesting conversations with one of their very high up architects there about that problem. He was ready to snap it drove him so nuts.
Their rating plummetted in the last couple years.
I haven't seen T'Pol decontaminate in several years.
At the risk of being modded up as funny, I doubt the two aren't related. I'm serious. "Informative", moderators, not "Funny".
Thanks.
Its not the same thing...
The Apollo test (renamed Apollo 1, it was *not* a "mission", just a test) wasn't going to end the program -- the program was a cold war move. It would've taken a lot more than anything NASA wanted to do to stop it at that point. The Soviets getting to the moon is probably the only thing that would've stopped it.
The HST repair was a bold move, but it was well designed technology, and there were a lot of engineers familiar with similar platforms from the construction and design of the Keyhole satellites. While bold, there was good reason to fix it.
The shuttle program has been a blundering mistake since day one. The tragedy happened in the early 70's when the decision was made to pursue it.
They still haven't recovered from THAT one. And they still haven't recovered from Challanger, almost 15 years ago. (Shuttle flights used to be FAR more commonplace before it). The shuttle program was a failure before Challanger when NASA couldn't meet the launch rates they'd promised. It was dead the day they stopped launching for two years after Challanger.
One could argue XM could decide not to blow half a billion dollars on a marketing stunt that will never pay off 1/10th of what it costs.
One could argue that might help them stay on the map. Its a lot easier to be on the map when you, say, still exist.
You laugh but I'm sure I'm not the only person on /. old enough to remember the media "frenzy" around the decision to rename Revenge of the Jedi to Return of the Jedi, even though you young whippersnappers probably have read all about it.
The appropriateness of "Revenge" used in a PG movie was a big part of it.
I was in first grade at the time, and clearly remember talking about it on the playground. "F$#% that" I think is what I said...
Its trivial to get detailed information on the person who registered a car given just their license plate. Know anyone who works at an insurance company? They can get it. Bank? Yup, them too. There are also pleanty of companies you can get the information from for $10 to $20, if you don't.
It doesn't require access to "police computers" or "police cooperation". They'll call the police because thats how laws are enforced. But if you piss the wrong person off on the highway, you may find out the hard way how easy it is to get the information.
I've known several people, first hand, who had that happen. Its even easier if the car is decked out with SCCA numbers and sponsor decals.
Its a *big* deal getting licensed by any of those organizations.
Safety inspections are similar. The inspections I have to have on my car to get on a track are FAR more detailed than a state inspection... getting my inspection sticker from the state is easy -- drive up, the wrench at the inspection station takes one look at the car, and asks me to drive it into the bay for him, checks the lights and gives me my sticker.
What race organization doesn't have strict licensing and certification requirements?
I can't think of one. SCCA certainly does, as does PCA and all the other club-level organizations I know of. FIA certainly does. NASCAR does. I don't know, but I have to assume CART does as well.
Seriously... car racing is probably one of the most strictly restricted sports out there... not only do you need the appropriate credentials, you have to meet minimum race requirements to keep your certification.
They have a total monopoly in the professional image editing marketspace. There are no other products. Gimp (which I prefer in many cases) can't do half of the things a professional graphic artist needs, plus the UI is too different to efficiently switch. And when looking at photo editing, I havent' seen ANY product that has good RAW support other than Photoshop (and its support is mediocre at best).
You had a playstation 1 in 1993?
Little factoid -- the guy who invented them died about a month ago today, I think.