I can see a Walmart blockchain where they control 51% of the 'nodes'
They don't need that. All they need is a single server which signs all the blocks with a secret private key. Everybody with access can verify the data, but nobody else can modify it.
Then only leave 1.5 times the distance. If you have the minimum safe distance in front, and the car in front of you slams on the brake, with someone else riding your tail, you'll end up in a collision.
If you can't leave enough space in front, because people end up cutting in, then move over and let the tailgater pass.
Above 70km/h, the increased distance to maintain a safe stopping distance becomes a bigger factor and the capacity decreases
The recommended distance is 2 seconds, so that means the gap grows linearly with the speed. The nose-nose interval between two cars is equal to the safe stopping distance + car length. The car length is constant, therefore, road capacity increases with speed.
a block of a dozen or so cars on cruise control radar-locked bumper to bumper - with larger spaces in front of and behind the train where new cars can merge into.
That only works as long as there are larger spaces. Too many people try to merge, and the larger spaces get smaller, until you reach the point where you have to deny traffic from the on ramp.
Better driving results in a slightly higher road capacity, but at the cost of reducing the margin for correcting small mistakes. At some point, someone inevitably will make a slightly bigger mistake, and mess it all up. The closer you get to optimal road capacity, the worse the consequences will be.
And a slight speed adjustment allows the distance to return to normal after the merge
The problem is that a road runs at maximum capacity when speed is high and distance is minimal. A slight speed adjustment, like you suggested, has the effect of decreasing maximum road capacity.
That means that the road after the merge point not only has to deal with more cars, but also with a lower capacity to carry those cars. This lower capacity will propagate backwards to the road before the merge point. And that's how you end up with a traffic jam.
Don't drive closer to the car in front of you than security dictates, even if there is a tailgater behind you.
You should do exactly the opposite. If someone tailgates you, leave more distance in front of you so you can afford to brake slowly, giving the person behind you more warning time.
Put all these constraints on and it seems obvious that you want to space cars uniformly with the minimal distance consistent with whatever statistical level of safety you demand
If all the cars are going at maximum speed with minimum safe distance between them, it becomes impossible for a single car to merge.
If everyone kept an equal distance and followed a standard merging pattern of every other car, then it would likely solve the merging problem as well.
No, because the distance between the cars before the merge point would be bigger than the distance after the merge point, which contradicts the assumption that all distances would be equal.
Either way for the call to go through, the phone company would know exactly who actually called you every single time.
Almost impossible to guarantee this. I have VOIP. It's only protected by a password. If someone manages to break into my home network and grab the password, they can add extra phone devices, and make outside calls.
Now, because your law guarantees real traceability, the police are going in even more trigger happy, because they know for sure they've got the right place.
As long as it's still freezing, gutters don't do much for catching snow. And if it's cold enough for icicles, it's probably cold enough for water to freeze in the drain pipe.
I really hope the media will find a new acronym or term to abuse in 2018, the "A.I." abuse in 2017 is really getting up my nose, and should die a very quick death.
Replaying pre-recorded phonemes is an adequate solution for poor quality speech, but you can't extend that method to reach high quality. In order to do that, you have to start over from scratch, using a much more difficult method.
Sounds like bullshit. A CD is only 650 MB, and holds 80 minutes of high quality audio. Who cares about the amount of digital storage for a couple of "b" and "t" samples ?
There's nothing that would make it multiply everybody's money by 1000x just because they put it in there.
Correct. But it does have a value. And if it starts at zero, goes to that value, and then stays there forever, that means the early adopters get a profit, and the late adopters get the value. Nobody loses anything.
Bitcoin has production costs that keep rising over time as the math to solve blocks get harder and harder by design.
No, the math doesn't get harder and harder. It is adjusted to keep the average at 6 blocks/hour. If more people start mining, the math will get harder, but if fewer people mine (for example because electricity prices go up, or bitcoin price goes down), then the math will get easier again.
Slashdot Mirror
I can see a Walmart blockchain where they control 51% of the 'nodes'
They don't need that. All they need is a single server which signs all the blocks with a secret private key. Everybody with access can verify the data, but nobody else can modify it.
Then only leave 1.5 times the distance. If you have the minimum safe distance in front, and the car in front of you slams on the brake, with someone else riding your tail, you'll end up in a collision.
If you can't leave enough space in front, because people end up cutting in, then move over and let the tailgater pass.
Above 70km/h, the increased distance to maintain a safe stopping distance becomes a bigger factor and the capacity decreases
The recommended distance is 2 seconds, so that means the gap grows linearly with the speed. The nose-nose interval between two cars is equal to the safe stopping distance + car length. The car length is constant, therefore, road capacity increases with speed.
In normal road conditions, there is no reason, other than poor driving, that anyone should ever have trouble merging into traffic.
Except when the gaps in traffic are already at the smallest safe distance.
a block of a dozen or so cars on cruise control radar-locked bumper to bumper - with larger spaces in front of and behind the train where new cars can merge into.
That only works as long as there are larger spaces. Too many people try to merge, and the larger spaces get smaller, until you reach the point where you have to deny traffic from the on ramp.
Better driving results in a slightly higher road capacity, but at the cost of reducing the margin for correcting small mistakes. At some point, someone inevitably will make a slightly bigger mistake, and mess it all up. The closer you get to optimal road capacity, the worse the consequences will be.
And a slight speed adjustment allows the distance to return to normal after the merge
The problem is that a road runs at maximum capacity when speed is high and distance is minimal. A slight speed adjustment, like you suggested, has the effect of decreasing maximum road capacity.
That means that the road after the merge point not only has to deal with more cars, but also with a lower capacity to carry those cars. This lower capacity will propagate backwards to the road before the merge point. And that's how you end up with a traffic jam.
Don't drive closer to the car in front of you than security dictates, even if there is a tailgater behind you.
You should do exactly the opposite. If someone tailgates you, leave more distance in front of you so you can afford to brake slowly, giving the person behind you more warning time.
Put all these constraints on and it seems obvious that you want to space cars uniformly with the minimal distance consistent with whatever statistical level of safety you demand
If all the cars are going at maximum speed with minimum safe distance between them, it becomes impossible for a single car to merge.
It's hard not to be a laggard, and always expeditious, while simultaneously not over accelerate/decelerate.
Common sense says we don't need math to show what is slowing down traffic.
Slow traffic is caused by trying to put more cars on a stretch of road than it can handle.
If everyone kept an equal distance and followed a standard merging pattern of every other car, then it would likely solve the merging problem as well.
No, because the distance between the cars before the merge point would be bigger than the distance after the merge point, which contradicts the assumption that all distances would be equal.
if you and everyone else on the road kept an equal distance between the cars ahead and behind, traffic would move twice as quickly.
Yes, because no one would be merging into traffic anymore.
The poor bastard who opened the door did not comply instantly with their instructions, as he was righteously confused...
A decent system allows for innocent people to be confused and not comply instantly, without getting executed on the spot.
A police officer could carry a shield to protect himself, instead of a finger on the trigger.
Either way for the call to go through, the phone company would know exactly who actually called you every single time.
Almost impossible to guarantee this. I have VOIP. It's only protected by a password. If someone manages to break into my home network and grab the password, they can add extra phone devices, and make outside calls.
Now, because your law guarantees real traceability, the police are going in even more trigger happy, because they know for sure they've got the right place.
As long as it's still freezing, gutters don't do much for catching snow. And if it's cold enough for icicles, it's probably cold enough for water to freeze in the drain pipe.
No one in normal, every day usage uses the term, "fiat cash"
Because in normal every day usage, that's implied.
But in a discussion where you talk about non-fiat money, it becomes useful to make the distinction explicit.
I really hope the media will find a new acronym or term to abuse in 2018, the "A.I." abuse in 2017 is really getting up my nose, and should die a very quick death.
Alternatively, you could just shut up about it.
One would ordinarily think that somebody who was worthy of the title "journalist" would know the definitions of words
I recommend not making too many assumptions in life, especially not where it concerns the expertise of journalists.
Was it really a vow, though ? Or did he just state his intentions ?
Ask him to translate something in his native language, record it, and then a few weeks later, ask him to translate it back.
Replaying pre-recorded phonemes is an adequate solution for poor quality speech, but you can't extend that method to reach high quality. In order to do that, you have to start over from scratch, using a much more difficult method.
Sounds like bullshit. A CD is only 650 MB, and holds 80 minutes of high quality audio. Who cares about the amount of digital storage for a couple of "b" and "t" samples ?
There's nothing that would make it multiply everybody's money by 1000x just because they put it in there.
Correct. But it does have a value. And if it starts at zero, goes to that value, and then stays there forever, that means the early adopters get a profit, and the late adopters get the value. Nobody loses anything.
Bitcoin has production costs that keep rising over time as the math to solve blocks get harder and harder by design.
No, the math doesn't get harder and harder. It is adjusted to keep the average at 6 blocks/hour. If more people start mining, the math will get harder, but if fewer people mine (for example because electricity prices go up, or bitcoin price goes down), then the math will get easier again.
> Bitcoin generates nothing out of thin air
There is economic value in the transactions and storage of wealth.