I'm also not sure a return to the time when the company that runs the physical layer has no reason to upgrade to allow more bandwidth is in our best interest.
Why wouldn't "get more money from renting more bandwidth out" not work? I assume that the laws makes it possible to run the physical network at a profit.
Anyway, it seems to work well here in DK (I believe we have about 3-4 backbones, with various coverages, plus some wireless offerings).
You saying you can open a bar in New York and stick a 'No Blacks' sign in the window?
And why exactly shouldn't you be allowed to do this? Your business won't last long -- the community will see to that -- so why do we need the Government to force you to let blacks into your business when the marketplace will see to it that you don't have a business for very long?
I am curious, what could the community (legally) do? I doubt the people visiting such places would be afraid of public denunciation.
It might be a derived work under copyright law, but not a derived work under GPL2's defintions, which means that GPL2's terms that talk about derivative works, might not apply. So you might have something that is legally a derivative work, but GPL2 might not give you any distribution rights. Or it might give you distribution (GPL2 defininition) rights, but then legally you might find that you still don't have distribution (copyright definition) rights.
You are arguing that if you base your work on some commercial engine, and pay a fee, you might get a lawsuit later because you paid even if you didn't have to pay, perhaps because you qualified for a free license. I do wonder if that makes onto my top 10 of "most-stupid-arguments-ever";)
First off, even if they do have particle filters, then it's at best the equivalent of a coal power plant which also has filters.
Yep, if you are looking solely at particle emissions. Of course, it doesn't have the e.g. quicksilver emissions coal does, nor the CO2.
Secondly, saying it has enough rainfall that they don't need to water yet there's no sort of runoff is pretty much contradictory; if it's raining that much, there's going to be need for surplus water to flow away.
I was talking about rivers. Of course there is runoff, that is pretty much unavoidable. However, with good crop rotation and fertilizing strategy, the runoff can be reduced to a level where it is not a problem. As you know, even a completely unused area is going to have runoff, but the sea can absorb some runoff without any ill effects.
Third, "surplus straw" is ridiculous. For one, straw left on the fields helps prevent erosion.
Erosion?! Many problems we have in Denmark, but except for a very few places erosion isn't one of them. We are a flat country.
For another, straw is livestock feed and bedding. If they weren't making use of it before, then they were just being wasteful; that's hardly an excuse for them to choose a bad use for it.
Modern farming produces much more straw than can be used for feed or bedding. Which is why, as you say, it is usually plowed down as fertilizer. (I won't comment on further on that contradiction;) )
The natural gas doesn't consume vast amounts of habitat per person, lead to massive dead zones near estuaries, or drain rivers of their water, either.
Obviously, you have never been to that island. There are no rivers, and DK usually gets enough rainfall that no artificial watering is necessary. And take a look at the landscape. There will be plenty of surplus straw from a place like this. And transport? You could almost throw the bales of straw to the furnace. Besides, I presume the straw is burned at biggish plants, which (of course) have particle filters, leaving your concerns about those moot.
The distinction between civil and criminal cases only exist within common law systems and do not exist in the majority of existing law systems in the world.
I live in a civil law country (Denmark), and we certainly have both criminal and civil cases. However, damages has to be justified by direct costs, and the bar is fairly high. (There are a few exceptions, e.g. rape, but those have more or less set amounts).
Not sure what would happen in a copyright case, though, as the real economic cost of someone uploading a song to pirate bay is hard to quantify, to say the least.
I totally understand you wanting to use Linux as your main system, but what's wrong with having a gaming system with Windows? If you really don't want to give MS money, then pirate it =p
b/c I don't like to pirate, and I don't care for all the extra work of keeping a win32 around for gaming. If I went that route, I'd buy a console, I think.
Which games? I can't even get Compiz to render properly on my system (8800GTX, 2.4GHz Q6600, 4GB DDR2 RAM).
Compiz is a proof of concept. Don't use it unless you like to explore new desktop concepts, and don't mind living on the bleeding edge. Use KDE if you want a flashy desktop.
If you can tell me any website anywhere on the internet that will help me get Crysis, Far Cry 2, Wolfenstein, WoW, Mirror's Edge, C&C3, and / or Prototype running on any linux distro, I'll be pretty surprised.
None of those games are, as far as I know, natively linux games. So why should I buy them?
Linking to WINE isn't an option; I don't want to spend 4 hours "fixing" it to get a game to run. If I can't install it and play in under 30 minutes, it's not applicable.
as I said, I don't buy games that don't run on linux. Though I have, for various reasons, tested HoN and some other game on wine and these ran just fine, which is an amazing achievement. See how well windows will run a native linux application!
If I really *had* to get these games, I'd buy a console. Windows is too expensive and too much hazzle to maintain, imho, unless you have to do that anyway. But as I said, I already have more good games than time to play these games, so I don't mind letting the market forces bring me native games.
The better question is, why don't coders make sure linux will run it (not, will it run on linux).?
You already know that it's going with be a game made to run on Windows. So instead of asking if they modified it so that it'll run perfectly on Linux, you should be asking why the people coding Linux don't focus on making sure Linux can run more games instead of features that no one (even the most die hard power user) uses.
And before you try to claim I'm a troll, I'm a big fan of Linux and love using it on my laptop - but my gaming system is Windows (for obvious reasons).
The short answer is: For technical reasons. And I'd never claim you were a troll, please give me some credit. I merely asked, does it run linux? I promise, I won't hate anyone if it doesn't, I just will not buy it!
Thanks for being part of the problem. Linux users won't buy games, so games developers won't develop for Linux, so Linux users won't buy games, so games developers won't develop for Linux...
I buy more games than I honestly have time to play. All for them with native linux support.
Maybe when Linux (all distros) has more desktop market share than a Microsoft OS which isn't even released yet they'll begin to care. Until then, please feel free to manually edit your.conf files, fiddle with wireless device "firmware" stripped out of Windows drivers, and live safe in the knowledge that you're intellectually elite compared to the rest of the Wintards (like myself) who are playing the games you can only whinge about.
I haven't edited any.conf files for my system, nor have I fiddled with wireless devices. I havn't even installed 3rdparty drivers. I am aware there is some firmware thing going on somewhere below (as I presume there are on windows), but that is handled somewhere beneath the hood. You do come across as someone with an inferiority complex.
Horses for courses. Get Windows or a console for gaming. Until there is a unified architecture for 3D rendering on Linux (like DirectX on Windows) you're living in a dream world.
It's there, it's older than DirectX, and it's called OpenGL. And anyway, I already play games on linux, so the technical side is obviously not a problem. It is merely a matter of whether this game's maker want to exploit the linux niche or not. If they don't, fine, I'll take my money elsewhere. Capitalism at work, no?
getting into Israel is the same as any other nation. Some police officer sits in a box, checks out your passport, looks at you, and stamps a visa into your passport.
The biggest bitch was getting an international passport from my local city. Damn, they make that difficult in the EU. And why does that stupid piece of paper has to cost over 100 euros ? (Yes I could get it at 50 euros if I'd waited "at least 4 weeks", great)
You can get it for 50 euroes? You lucky bastard! The price here (DK) is 80 euros, to delivered in perhaps 2 months (no garantees). Usually, it's only a week, but you never know.
I've worked on some large technical documents (several hundred pages) in this way. The document is built up from many smaller chunks which are stored in a version control system. Then to get the entire thing you need to 'build' it. It's actually a major pain in the ass because there simply aren't too many good ways to do this. Whenever anything breaks it's a pain in the ass for everyone.
When comparing this to an enterprise-level document management system, I don't see any advantages at present. The document management systems can include version control and diffing with file-format specific implementations. You wouldn't want to do a binary diff on a word doc for example. It's also usually smarter for these kinds of tasks workflow wise. I'm sure everyone working on these bills have access to some kind of document management system. They're not just passing around USB keys and checking their gmail. The systems they're using are probably perfectly suited for what's being done.
Legal documents appears to be plain text, actually, perhaps with some simple headings.
I expect better systems to evolve but simply trying to drop something in CVS has a lot of hidden costs.
CVS? Are you pulling my tail? SVN is antiquated enough without mentioning CVS!
The idea is fine and good, which is why it is unlikely to be implemented. After all, if you can filter changes and search by text, then how are you going to hide riders in your bills.
You have the politicians you vote for, you know, at least in the part of the world with direct elections. I don't believe most politicians are evil or subversive, though some of course are.
But have you ever tried to convince your colleagues to do something a better way? It is not always easy (my current colleagues are of course *brilliant* and always a step ahead/waves/)
So when someone develops a way of doing something electronically that is novel, it should be just as worthy of receiving a patent as another idea that needs physical implementation. The milieu shouldn't matter.
"Why should the station be charging the batteries?"
For the same reason that rechargeable batteries (or any rechargeable item) need to be charged after purchase. They may not be precharged and/or they may be only partially charged.
And batteries are heavy and take up lots of space and would require many deliveries.
For sure, but trucks can carry quite a few batteries, and remember, most people would be charging at home. As for the rechargeable batteries today, they are not precharged because that prolongs their shelf life. If we are moving batteries as quickly as the this, that would hardly be a problem.
In conclusion, there is no real obstacles for having electric cars like this, except for that tiny itchy problem that the battery tech is just too expensive and not quite good enough, and not durable enough. Give us a battery that has a reasonable write-off and capacity, is stable and don't decharge much when unused, and the rest would be easy. Note that such batteries would be thrice-welcome for the windmill industry.
Who in their right mind gets their hands wet on fuel every time they stop at the pump? oO;
Really, learn to use the pump right.
Either the fuel pump handles (or whatever they are called) are cleaner elsewhere, or you just don't have a sense of smell. I have never spilled yet, but I do smell the diesel on my hands every time I have tanked diesel. Hm. Of course, it might be different with gas, I have never tried tanking gas.
However, due to the limitations of household current (at least here in the USA), recharging the battery pack from a standard 110 V/15 amp connection could take 7-8 hours even with improved battery pack designs. You'd probably need the same 220 V connection used by electric ranges and electric clothes dryers to keep the recharge time reasonable.
Forgive my ignorance og the American system, but around here 400V/16A is pretty much universal (from two phases, used for stoves and ovens and such). Surely you have something similar? If push comes to shove, you could hook up two of these for 12.8kW, which should get the job done 'ere the cock crows.
Why should the station be charging the batteries? Why not have them delivered by trucks from a factory? I mean, it's not like the station refines crude oil today.
yeah right, its going to be REAL PRACTICAL to put 500 mile range into a battery pack. the gasoline nozzle pumps 3 MEGAWATTS of energy into your gas tank in 2 minutes. try to get a battery pack to recharge that fast or hold that much energy and what you have is a BOMB (literally, a coupla sticks of dynamite)..
However, you cannot fill up the gas tank at home. That is one of the killer features of the battery: no more annoying visits to the gas station, just plug it in when you get home. No more fiddling around with plastic gloves/wait for your fingers to stop smelling of diesel.
And seriously, driving more than 800km in a day is a long stretch.
But I do not really believe that range will be the range on a motorway for a holiday-packed car:)
I'm claiming that the people that claim that tailgating is unsafe have an easy fix. Get out of the way. To knowingly endanger themselves by remaining in harms way for some misguided sense of viligantism is silly. Furthermore, their statements of the safety and legality of themselves and others is in error.
I get out of the way when it is reasonble to do so, that is, when the lane to the right is clear and I have sufficient distance to the other cars. That might, of course, take a while. Meanwhile, if you are driving closer than 2s to me, you are breaking the law, endangering your fellow humans for no good reason. I note you have not refuted that there is no good reason for tailgating, for I assume you agree with this.
I'm also stating that you are less likely to die while being tailgated than when the person is following at the recommended 24 seconds of following distance. More likely to be hit, but less likely to die.
Compare this with what you say about your government futher on. See any likeness? You should.
Far from hushed-up, eh?
"A Simulator Study of the Combined Effects of Alcohol and Marijuana on Driving Behavior-Phase II"... They just pretend it never happened.
If the study is any good, it is where it belongs: in the scientific paper that published it. Those are not always available to search engines, unfortunately. But again, hardly hushed up, just ignored as an inconvenient study (like you do re tailgating)
Who said I tailgate? I just look at what cause fatalities, and attempt to minimize that for myself and others. I don't care if someone tailgates me. They aren't causing me harm. I don't block on motorways. Those that do are stupidly breaking the law in order to reduce their own safety.
Who said I block on the motorway? I don't, as it happens, unless I happen to be overtaking someone. Most people drive really nicely, but there are a few idiots/tailgaters out there, unfortunately.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm also not sure a return to the time when the company that runs the physical layer has no reason to upgrade to allow more bandwidth is in our best interest.
Why wouldn't "get more money from renting more bandwidth out" not work? I assume that the laws makes it possible to run the physical network at a profit.
Anyway, it seems to work well here in DK (I believe we have about 3-4 backbones, with various coverages, plus some wireless offerings).
You saying you can open a bar in New York and stick a 'No Blacks' sign in the window?
And why exactly shouldn't you be allowed to do this? Your business won't last long -- the community will see to that -- so why do we need the Government to force you to let blacks into your business when the marketplace will see to it that you don't have a business for very long?
I am curious, what could the community (legally) do? I doubt the people visiting such places would be afraid of public denunciation.
It might be a derived work under copyright law, but not a derived work under GPL2's defintions, which means that GPL2's terms that talk about derivative works, might not apply. So you might have something that is legally a derivative work, but GPL2 might not give you any distribution rights. Or it might give you distribution (GPL2 defininition) rights, but then legally you might find that you still don't have distribution (copyright definition) rights.
You are arguing that if you base your work on some commercial engine, and pay a fee, you might get a lawsuit later because you paid even if you didn't have to pay, perhaps because you qualified for a free license. I do wonder if that makes onto my top 10 of "most-stupid-arguments-ever" ;)
First off, even if they do have particle filters, then it's at best the equivalent of a coal power plant which also has filters.
Yep, if you are looking solely at particle emissions. Of course, it doesn't have the e.g. quicksilver emissions coal does, nor the CO2.
Secondly, saying it has enough rainfall that they don't need to water yet there's no sort of runoff is pretty much contradictory; if it's raining that much, there's going to be need for surplus water to flow away.
I was talking about rivers. Of course there is runoff, that is pretty much unavoidable. However, with good crop rotation and fertilizing strategy, the runoff can be reduced to a level where it is not a problem. As you know, even a completely unused area is going to have runoff, but the sea can absorb some runoff without any ill effects.
Third, "surplus straw" is ridiculous. For one, straw left on the fields helps prevent erosion.
Erosion?! Many problems we have in Denmark, but except for a very few places erosion isn't one of them. We are a flat country.
For another, straw is livestock feed and bedding. If they weren't making use of it before, then they were just being wasteful; that's hardly an excuse for them to choose a bad use for it.
Modern farming produces much more straw than can be used for feed or bedding. Which is why, as you say, it is usually plowed down as fertilizer. (I won't comment on further on that contradiction ;) )
The natural gas doesn't consume vast amounts of habitat per person, lead to massive dead zones near estuaries, or drain rivers of their water, either.
Obviously, you have never been to that island. There are no rivers, and DK usually gets enough rainfall that no artificial watering is necessary. And take a look at the landscape. There will be plenty of surplus straw from a place like this. And transport? You could almost throw the bales of straw to the furnace. Besides, I presume the straw is burned at biggish plants, which (of course) have particle filters, leaving your concerns about those moot.
The distinction between civil and criminal cases only exist within common law systems and do not exist in the majority of existing law systems in the world.
I live in a civil law country (Denmark), and we certainly have both criminal and civil cases. However, damages has to be justified by direct costs, and the bar is fairly high. (There are a few exceptions, e.g. rape, but those have more or less set amounts).
Not sure what would happen in a copyright case, though, as the real economic cost of someone uploading a song to pirate bay is hard to quantify, to say the least.
I totally understand you wanting to use Linux as your main system, but what's wrong with having a gaming system with Windows? If you really don't want to give MS money, then pirate it =p
b/c I don't like to pirate, and I don't care for all the extra work of keeping a win32 around for gaming. If I went that route, I'd buy a console, I think.
Which games? I can't even get Compiz to render properly on my system (8800GTX, 2.4GHz Q6600, 4GB DDR2 RAM).
Compiz is a proof of concept. Don't use it unless you like to explore new desktop concepts, and don't mind living on the bleeding edge. Use KDE if you want a flashy desktop.
If you can tell me any website anywhere on the internet that will help me get Crysis, Far Cry 2, Wolfenstein, WoW, Mirror's Edge, C&C3, and / or Prototype running on any linux distro, I'll be pretty surprised.
None of those games are, as far as I know, natively linux games. So why should I buy them?
Linking to WINE isn't an option; I don't want to spend 4 hours "fixing" it to get a game to run. If I can't install it and play in under 30 minutes, it's not applicable.
as I said, I don't buy games that don't run on linux. Though I have, for various reasons, tested HoN and some other game on wine and these ran just fine, which is an amazing achievement. See how well windows will run a native linux application!
If I really *had* to get these games, I'd buy a console. Windows is too expensive and too much hazzle to maintain, imho, unless you have to do that anyway. But as I said, I already have more good games than time to play these games, so I don't mind letting the market forces bring me native games.
The better question is, why don't coders make sure linux will run it (not, will it run on linux).?
You already know that it's going with be a game made to run on Windows. So instead of asking if they modified it so that it'll run perfectly on Linux, you should be asking why the people coding Linux don't focus on making sure Linux can run more games instead of features that no one (even the most die hard power user) uses.
It's kind of like this http://xkcd.com/619/
And before you try to claim I'm a troll, I'm a big fan of Linux and love using it on my laptop - but my gaming system is Windows (for obvious reasons).
The short answer is: For technical reasons. And I'd never claim you were a troll, please give me some credit. I merely asked, does it run linux? I promise, I won't hate anyone if it doesn't, I just will not buy it!
Thanks for being part of the problem. Linux users won't buy games, so games developers won't develop for Linux, so Linux users won't buy games, so games developers won't develop for Linux...
I buy more games than I honestly have time to play. All for them with native linux support.
Maybe when Linux (all distros) has more desktop market share than a Microsoft OS which isn't even released yet they'll begin to care. Until then, please feel free to manually edit your .conf files, fiddle with wireless device "firmware" stripped out of Windows drivers, and live safe in the knowledge that you're intellectually elite compared to the rest of the Wintards (like myself) who are playing the games you can only whinge about.
I haven't edited any .conf files for my system, nor have I fiddled with wireless devices. I havn't even installed 3rdparty drivers. I am aware there is some firmware thing going on somewhere below (as I presume there are on windows), but that is handled somewhere beneath the hood. You do come across as someone with an inferiority complex.
Horses for courses. Get Windows or a console for gaming. Until there is a unified architecture for 3D rendering on Linux (like DirectX on Windows) you're living in a dream world.
It's there, it's older than DirectX, and it's called OpenGL. And anyway, I already play games on linux, so the technical side is obviously not a problem. It is merely a matter of whether this game's maker want to exploit the linux niche or not. If they don't, fine, I'll take my money elsewhere. Capitalism at work, no?
Will it run on linux? Otherwise, I'll pass.
getting into Israel is the same as any other nation. Some police officer sits in a box, checks out your passport, looks at you, and stamps a visa into your passport.
The biggest bitch was getting an international passport from my local city. Damn, they make that difficult in the EU. And why does that stupid piece of paper has to cost over 100 euros ? (Yes I could get it at 50 euros if I'd waited "at least 4 weeks", great)
You can get it for 50 euroes? You lucky bastard! The price here (DK) is 80 euros, to delivered in perhaps 2 months (no garantees). Usually, it's only a week, but you never know.
I've worked on some large technical documents (several hundred pages) in this way. The document is built up from many smaller chunks which are stored in a version control system. Then to get the entire thing you need to 'build' it. It's actually a major pain in the ass because there simply aren't too many good ways to do this. Whenever anything breaks it's a pain in the ass for everyone.
When comparing this to an enterprise-level document management system, I don't see any advantages at present. The document management systems can include version control and diffing with file-format specific implementations. You wouldn't want to do a binary diff on a word doc for example. It's also usually smarter for these kinds of tasks workflow wise. I'm sure everyone working on these bills have access to some kind of document management system. They're not just passing around USB keys and checking their gmail. The systems they're using are probably perfectly suited for what's being done.
Legal documents appears to be plain text, actually, perhaps with some simple headings.
I expect better systems to evolve but simply trying to drop something in CVS has a lot of hidden costs.
CVS? Are you pulling my tail? SVN is antiquated enough without mentioning CVS!
The idea is fine and good, which is why it is unlikely to be implemented. After all, if you can filter changes and search by text, then how are you going to hide riders in your bills.
You have the politicians you vote for, you know, at least in the part of the world with direct elections. I don't believe most politicians are evil or subversive, though some of course are.
But have you ever tried to convince your colleagues to do something a better way? It is not always easy (my current colleagues are of course *brilliant* and always a step ahead /waves/)
The idea is fine and good, but the system probably runs too far behind everything else to take this up for some years to come.
The value of a novel idea is in the idea itself.
I disagree. The believe the value of an idea is the net earning that this idea will earn.
So when someone develops a way of doing something electronically that is novel, it should be just as worthy of receiving a patent as another idea that needs physical implementation. The milieu shouldn't matter.
Why shouldn't the milieu matter?
"Why should the station be charging the batteries?"
For the same reason that rechargeable batteries (or any rechargeable item) need to be charged after purchase. They may not be precharged and/or they may be only partially charged.
And batteries are heavy and take up lots of space and would require many deliveries.
For sure, but trucks can carry quite a few batteries, and remember, most people would be charging at home. As for the rechargeable batteries today, they are not precharged because that prolongs their shelf life. If we are moving batteries as quickly as the this, that would hardly be a problem.
In conclusion, there is no real obstacles for having electric cars like this, except for that tiny itchy problem that the battery tech is just too expensive and not quite good enough, and not durable enough. Give us a battery that has a reasonable write-off and capacity, is stable and don't decharge much when unused, and the rest would be easy. Note that such batteries would be thrice-welcome for the windmill industry.
Who in their right mind gets their hands wet on fuel every time they stop at the pump? oO;
Really, learn to use the pump right.
Either the fuel pump handles (or whatever they are called) are cleaner elsewhere, or you just don't have a sense of smell. I have never spilled yet, but I do smell the diesel on my hands every time I have tanked diesel. Hm. Of course, it might be different with gas, I have never tried tanking gas.
Home is fine except for the capacity. Can the existing grid support the transfer? Can your house? Can the current infrastructure GENERATE the power?
Yes, yes and yes. At least here, in DK, assuming the load is not during peak ours (and why should it be?)
No more fiddling around with plastic gloves/wait for your fingers to stop smelling of diesel.
If you're that sloppy with the nozzle, you should probably let the station attendant take care of your refilling.
I haven't spilled yet, but just touching the handle makes my hand smell.
However, due to the limitations of household current (at least here in the USA), recharging the battery pack from a standard 110 V/15 amp connection could take 7-8 hours even with improved battery pack designs. You'd probably need the same 220 V connection used by electric ranges and electric clothes dryers to keep the recharge time reasonable.
Forgive my ignorance og the American system, but around here 400V/16A is pretty much universal (from two phases, used for stoves and ovens and such). Surely you have something similar? If push comes to shove, you could hook up two of these for 12.8kW, which should get the job done 'ere the cock crows.
Why should the station be charging the batteries? Why not have them delivered by trucks from a factory? I mean, it's not like the station refines crude oil today.
yeah right, its going to be REAL PRACTICAL to put 500 mile range into a battery pack. the gasoline nozzle pumps 3 MEGAWATTS of energy into your gas tank in 2 minutes. try to get a battery pack to recharge that fast or hold that much energy and what you have is a BOMB (literally, a coupla sticks of dynamite)..
However, you cannot fill up the gas tank at home. That is one of the killer features of the battery: no more annoying visits to the gas station, just plug it in when you get home. No more fiddling around with plastic gloves/wait for your fingers to stop smelling of diesel.
And seriously, driving more than 800km in a day is a long stretch.
But I do not really believe that range will be the range on a motorway for a holiday-packed car :)
I'm claiming that the people that claim that tailgating is unsafe have an easy fix. Get out of the way. To knowingly endanger themselves by remaining in harms way for some misguided sense of viligantism is silly. Furthermore, their statements of the safety and legality of themselves and others is in error.
I get out of the way when it is reasonble to do so, that is, when the lane to the right is clear and I have sufficient distance to the other cars. That might, of course, take a while. Meanwhile, if you are driving closer than 2s to me, you are breaking the law, endangering your fellow humans for no good reason. I note you have not refuted that there is no good reason for tailgating, for I assume you agree with this.
I'm also stating that you are less likely to die while being tailgated than when the person is following at the recommended 24 seconds of following distance. More likely to be hit, but less likely to die.
Compare this with what you say about your government futher on. See any likeness? You should.
Far from hushed-up, eh?
"A Simulator Study of the Combined Effects of Alcohol and Marijuana on Driving Behavior-Phase II" ... They just pretend it never happened.
If the study is any good, it is where it belongs: in the scientific paper that published it. Those are not always available to search engines, unfortunately. But again, hardly hushed up, just ignored as an inconvenient study (like you do re tailgating)
Who said I tailgate? I just look at what cause fatalities, and attempt to minimize that for myself and others. I don't care if someone tailgates me. They aren't causing me harm. I don't block on motorways. Those that do are stupidly breaking the law in order to reduce their own safety.
Who said I block on the motorway? I don't, as it happens, unless I happen to be overtaking someone. Most people drive really nicely, but there are a few idiots/tailgaters out there, unfortunately.