And as far as that 'braking can never overcome the engine power' story popping up later: it can not be true,
Yes, it can. I've had partial brake failure from a single stop downhill from about 100 mph in a '87 American car with drum rear brakes (starting from cold brakes). If the throttle had been stuck open, that 100 hp 2.5l would have overpowered the brakes.
Note, if I had locked up the brakes at 100 mph, I'd have stopped faster, and the engine wouldn't have been able to overpower the brakes. But, given a little fade, it's enough to tip the scales, especially if someone uses the brakes for 10 seconds to hold the car's speed, not realizing the urgency of the situation.
Yes, if you are traveling 55 and the throttle suddenly applies at 100%, your first instinct is not to stomp the brake with maximum force, bringing the car to an abrupt halt, but instead to press the brake progressively to hold speed. Do that for 10 seconds, and your brakes may no longer be strong enough to halt the car.
Audi was improper pedal application, but Toyota looks more like an actual unintended acceleration, followed by poor driver reactions.
[I want ] An app that detects eyelid dilation, eye movements per minute, and eye movement speed could set off warnings when a driver is [...] too tired
Yes, when you edit with intent to deceive, it's obvious. It's not like we can't all look it up.
And I know someone who made enough to pay the $150 minimum, but took cash-only jobs and lied about his income. The reason they are so hard on the honest guys is that most cheat, when given the chance.
The system is fucked, but it's better than it was before.
Or, it'd save lives, as most "drunk driving" crashes these days are from people that weren't drunk, but the effects of coming home from the bar at 4 a.m. lead to them falling asleep at the wheel, and the current rules for identifying crashes as "alcohol related" (later used for drunk driving statistics) would include them, as if alcohol was illegal, they wouldn't have gone to the bar, even if they were a 100% sober designated driver. And the drowsy warning could help drivers roll down the window, turn on the A/C, turn up the radio, or pull over or whatever they need to do to stay safe.
The point is, it could cut "drunk driving" crashes even if 100% of drunk people don't use it.
What was the question I asked that I already knew the answer to? I personally would like it best for a drowsiness detector, and most reasonable people would welcome such a tool. It would also be able to detect impairments of other kinds, such as drug, indicating actual impaiment, not just drug-level presumptions. I used alcohol as the most widely understood example. Some people would welcome something that would give a more accurate reading. Some people follow "rules of thumb" and still get arrested.
Let's imagine you could buy a car that was $2000 cheaper without airbags - Would people buy them?
Airbags were available in the early '70s. They were a commercial failure. People would buy the cheaper car. I know this because, given the choice, they did. Same reason people have boats without enough life jackets for everyone on board.
Yeah, like the Subaru dealer I took my 2002 WRX to for the ABS TSB (not a recall, just a non-safety update to make the brakes work). I called the dealer and read off the TSB number. They said "bring it in". I brought it in without the TSB paperwork, as they indicated they were fine with the appointment I made. They wern't. They didn't know about they TSB. I left and came back later with the paperwork. They couldn't find it in their system, and had to "research" the issue. Two weeks later they called back and indicated they could fix my car, after the parts came in, in another two weeks. Eventually, I got the ECU replaced (yes, the Engine control unit controls the brakes). They didn't handle that (not a ) recall in a manner that would get me to go back there. If there had been another dealer within 500 miles, I'd have gone there.
You don't update the phone during a call. You load the update and apply next reboot. Reboot the car when parked for the night. Problem solved. Why would you assume the worst with one and the best with the other? It makes you look biased or dumb (or both).
The distance eyelids are opened. They get more narrow the more tired you get. Sounded better than measuring the weight of eyelids (heavy eyelids is a medical term, but "heavy" isn't a measure of mass, but a psychological feeling that can be measured by observing the distance the eyelids are opened.
No, my father and uncle collected more than their share of DUIs. I'm more familiar with habitual and binge drinkers than I'd like. Did you have a comment on the app, or just insults to throw at me?
Yeah, and anecdotes are shit next to statistics. 76% of of the "deadbeat dads" in California are really dead broke dads.
Nothing in your link contradicts anything I said. I mentioned the case where the debtor deliberately passes on opportunities to ensure they are dead broke, and thus, judgement proof.
If you tried reading what I wrote, rather than assuming some agenda or opinion that wasn't stated that you don't like and want to attack, you might have less to argue with. But where's the fun in understanding what the other person said before attacking them for things they didn't even say?
Right, which is why "common carrier" as currently defined is likely *not* what we want from the Internet. The USPS gives special treatment based on sender, and is a common carrier. So why not keep them as an information service, and change the rules to prohibit anti-competitive behavior?
After all, that's what this is really about, abusing the customer or competitors to increase profits. That should be illegal, and "net neutrality" should be the rules around those illegally abusive tactics done by ISPs.
So you shouldn't have an app that could tell you too tired because it would also tell you if you were too drunk?
I don't drink, and I don't like anti-drinking laws. The problem should be the impariment, not whether you've touched a forbidden drug. And measuring eye movement is the most direct measure of impairment that's practical.
Why do you object to an app telling you if you are too impaired to know you are impaired?
That's because, despite what the idiots on Slashdot assert, the point isn't video. It's having a convenient screen always in view. The camera is more for environmental awareness than recording people/events. It is *not* an augmented reality device because the side-screen can't overlay information on the visual field of the wearer.
When you think of it as a convenient remote display, and nothing more, then it becomes much less "interesting".
The only app I'd want is a drunk driving app. An app that detects eyelid dilation, eye movements per minute, and eye movement speed could set off warnings when a driver is unsafe (too tired, too drunk). And that doesn't even use the external-facing camera.
The USPS can charge different rates depending on who you are. Pre-sorted and not - special rates to some special package senders, Netflix and the like. Junk mail is charged at a vastly different rates than First Class. The USPS allows different classes based on the amount paid. The content is managed, even if only based on the sender. The USPS uses drug dogs and scanners to divine the contents. So yes, the content matters.
The glasses would have been broken and Martin would still be dead. You don't leave witnesses, and "accudentally" stepping on them in the rain would go a long way to making them unusable.
I'm waiting for the driving goggles that have cameras around the car feeding into a VR headset. 360 view in 180 headturn. No blind spots. No need for windows, and optics that correct for any human deficiency (color-mapped to change traffic light color for colorblind drivers, off-center warnings to indicate emergency vehicles and situations). Piping information in to a driver in real-time with image processing is the next step of safety. Full HUD and image corrections to "fix" common human errors.
What they really needed to go with the pizza bread is a community performance of the Cirque du Solei. Why bother with figurative bread and circuises, when you can get literal ones?
Of course, that mess was directly caused by the Clinton Administration's removal of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933.
You mean the Republican Congress's passing of the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (named for 3 promenent Republicans)? Funny how Congress is at fault for everything bad when the president is Republican, and the "administration" is at fault when Congress is majority Republican.
9/11 would never have happened if Nancy Pelosi wasn't elected, right?
And the Republicans who passed it at the time stated it couldn't cause the problems it was later blamed for by other Republicans. So where they lying then, or are they lying now? Oh, they are politicians, so it's both. Not that the Democrats are any better, but lying to implicate one and exhonerate the other is evil, and makes you one of the reasons the US is failing.
Slashdot Mirror
And as far as that 'braking can never overcome the engine power' story popping up later: it can not be true,
Yes, it can. I've had partial brake failure from a single stop downhill from about 100 mph in a '87 American car with drum rear brakes (starting from cold brakes). If the throttle had been stuck open, that 100 hp 2.5l would have overpowered the brakes.
Note, if I had locked up the brakes at 100 mph, I'd have stopped faster, and the engine wouldn't have been able to overpower the brakes. But, given a little fade, it's enough to tip the scales, especially if someone uses the brakes for 10 seconds to hold the car's speed, not realizing the urgency of the situation.
Yes, if you are traveling 55 and the throttle suddenly applies at 100%, your first instinct is not to stomp the brake with maximum force, bringing the car to an abrupt halt, but instead to press the brake progressively to hold speed. Do that for 10 seconds, and your brakes may no longer be strong enough to halt the car.
Audi was improper pedal application, but Toyota looks more like an actual unintended acceleration, followed by poor driver reactions.
[I want ] An app that detects eyelid dilation, eye movements per minute, and eye movement speed could set off warnings when a driver is [...] too tired
Yes, when you edit with intent to deceive, it's obvious. It's not like we can't all look it up.
And I know someone who made enough to pay the $150 minimum, but took cash-only jobs and lied about his income. The reason they are so hard on the honest guys is that most cheat, when given the chance.
The system is fucked, but it's better than it was before.
Or, it'd save lives, as most "drunk driving" crashes these days are from people that weren't drunk, but the effects of coming home from the bar at 4 a.m. lead to them falling asleep at the wheel, and the current rules for identifying crashes as "alcohol related" (later used for drunk driving statistics) would include them, as if alcohol was illegal, they wouldn't have gone to the bar, even if they were a 100% sober designated driver. And the drowsy warning could help drivers roll down the window, turn on the A/C, turn up the radio, or pull over or whatever they need to do to stay safe.
The point is, it could cut "drunk driving" crashes even if 100% of drunk people don't use it.
Then why are domesitcated cats so dissimilar to domesticated dogs? It doesn't seem to be consistent across all domestications.
Then you take them off and are no worse than today.
What was the question I asked that I already knew the answer to? I personally would like it best for a drowsiness detector, and most reasonable people would welcome such a tool. It would also be able to detect impairments of other kinds, such as drug, indicating actual impaiment, not just drug-level presumptions. I used alcohol as the most widely understood example. Some people would welcome something that would give a more accurate reading. Some people follow "rules of thumb" and still get arrested.
Let's imagine you could buy a car that was $2000 cheaper without airbags - Would people buy them?
Airbags were available in the early '70s. They were a commercial failure. People would buy the cheaper car. I know this because, given the choice, they did. Same reason people have boats without enough life jackets for everyone on board.
Yeah, like the Subaru dealer I took my 2002 WRX to for the ABS TSB (not a recall, just a non-safety update to make the brakes work). I called the dealer and read off the TSB number. They said "bring it in". I brought it in without the TSB paperwork, as they indicated they were fine with the appointment I made. They wern't. They didn't know about they TSB. I left and came back later with the paperwork. They couldn't find it in their system, and had to "research" the issue. Two weeks later they called back and indicated they could fix my car, after the parts came in, in another two weeks. Eventually, I got the ECU replaced (yes, the Engine control unit controls the brakes). They didn't handle that (not a ) recall in a manner that would get me to go back there. If there had been another dealer within 500 miles, I'd have gone there.
You don't update the phone during a call. You load the update and apply next reboot. Reboot the car when parked for the night. Problem solved. Why would you assume the worst with one and the best with the other? It makes you look biased or dumb (or both).
The distance eyelids are opened. They get more narrow the more tired you get. Sounded better than measuring the weight of eyelids (heavy eyelids is a medical term, but "heavy" isn't a measure of mass, but a psychological feeling that can be measured by observing the distance the eyelids are opened.
No, my father and uncle collected more than their share of DUIs. I'm more familiar with habitual and binge drinkers than I'd like. Did you have a comment on the app, or just insults to throw at me?
Yeah, and anecdotes are shit next to statistics. 76% of of the "deadbeat dads" in California are really dead broke dads.
Nothing in your link contradicts anything I said. I mentioned the case where the debtor deliberately passes on opportunities to ensure they are dead broke, and thus, judgement proof.
If you tried reading what I wrote, rather than assuming some agenda or opinion that wasn't stated that you don't like and want to attack, you might have less to argue with. But where's the fun in understanding what the other person said before attacking them for things they didn't even say?
Thankfully "you" is plural, and could apply to thee, and millions of others not yet born.
If that worked, where are there so many drunk drivers on the road?
Right, which is why "common carrier" as currently defined is likely *not* what we want from the Internet. The USPS gives special treatment based on sender, and is a common carrier. So why not keep them as an information service, and change the rules to prohibit anti-competitive behavior?
After all, that's what this is really about, abusing the customer or competitors to increase profits. That should be illegal, and "net neutrality" should be the rules around those illegally abusive tactics done by ISPs.
So you shouldn't have an app that could tell you too tired because it would also tell you if you were too drunk?
I don't drink, and I don't like anti-drinking laws. The problem should be the impariment, not whether you've touched a forbidden drug. And measuring eye movement is the most direct measure of impairment that's practical.
Why do you object to an app telling you if you are too impaired to know you are impaired?
That's because, despite what the idiots on Slashdot assert, the point isn't video. It's having a convenient screen always in view. The camera is more for environmental awareness than recording people/events. It is *not* an augmented reality device because the side-screen can't overlay information on the visual field of the wearer.
When you think of it as a convenient remote display, and nothing more, then it becomes much less "interesting".
The only app I'd want is a drunk driving app. An app that detects eyelid dilation, eye movements per minute, and eye movement speed could set off warnings when a driver is unsafe (too tired, too drunk). And that doesn't even use the external-facing camera.
The USPS can charge different rates depending on who you are. Pre-sorted and not - special rates to some special package senders, Netflix and the like. Junk mail is charged at a vastly different rates than First Class. The USPS allows different classes based on the amount paid. The content is managed, even if only based on the sender. The USPS uses drug dogs and scanners to divine the contents. So yes, the content matters.
Yes, because you shouldn't have the right to record what you can see.
The glasses would have been broken and Martin would still be dead. You don't leave witnesses, and "accudentally" stepping on them in the rain would go a long way to making them unusable.
I'm waiting for the driving goggles that have cameras around the car feeding into a VR headset. 360 view in 180 headturn. No blind spots. No need for windows, and optics that correct for any human deficiency (color-mapped to change traffic light color for colorblind drivers, off-center warnings to indicate emergency vehicles and situations). Piping information in to a driver in real-time with image processing is the next step of safety. Full HUD and image corrections to "fix" common human errors.
What they really needed to go with the pizza bread is a community performance of the Cirque du Solei. Why bother with figurative bread and circuises, when you can get literal ones?
Of course, that mess was directly caused by the Clinton Administration's removal of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933.
You mean the Republican Congress's passing of the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (named for 3 promenent Republicans)? Funny how Congress is at fault for everything bad when the president is Republican, and the "administration" is at fault when Congress is majority Republican.
9/11 would never have happened if Nancy Pelosi wasn't elected, right?
And the Republicans who passed it at the time stated it couldn't cause the problems it was later blamed for by other Republicans. So where they lying then, or are they lying now? Oh, they are politicians, so it's both. Not that the Democrats are any better, but lying to implicate one and exhonerate the other is evil, and makes you one of the reasons the US is failing.