At the least, when you answer an email, that begins a quarter hour of paid time. More if answering it takes longer.
When you answer the phone, same thing. And more if you were woken up. At least a half an hour.
With an option for the company to let you take comp time during normal hours to avoid having to pay for the time. (And of course escrow money to pay for any time outstanding if you are fired or laid off).
Guccifer 2.0, Cambridge Anal. and Species Jumping...
It's all coming together quite nicely. Trump lawyers heading for the exits is a good sign. Top law firms telling him, "Nah, we're good. Best of luck, Mr President". Hires a warmonger to be his new National Security Advisor. I'm old enough to remember when people said Trump hated foreign wars.
Trump signs the Democrats' spending bill and headed to Mar-a-Lago for a week. I know what he'll be watching on TV Sunday night. Best believe Melania's got a legal team combing over the pre-nup and the NDA. Stormy's got pictures and video. Karen McDougal's got receipts. Mueller's checking off boxes.
All this in the last three days. It seems like only last week that his third consecutive endorsee in a congressional election went down to defeat. Oh wait, it was just last week. Oh yeah, I forgot: Breitbart guys were caught on tape trying to bribe a lawyer to lie about his client. What am I forgetting?
#WINNING -- You are welcome on my lawn.
----
Yea, I swear to god a week in the Trump presidency is like a presidential dog year. He has more scandals in a week than most presidents have in a year.
The whole market is just above long term support now. If it drops 1% more, it could set off a lot of algo and technical trading that could take it down another 5% in a day or two. Hopefully at that longer term support, they'll start buying again. If that longer term support broached, there is no telling where the bottom is at that point.
The street lights just before where the accident occurred may have blinded the camera too.
Also the bushes and small trees to the left on the median would have blocked lidar and visual L.O.S. until she entered the road *and* the car was within 50'.
The road literally widened from 2 to 4 lanes right where the accident occurred.
I don't see how an approaching car or human could have seen her before she was on the road.
I regularly (2-3 times a year) drive up on people who I simply do not see at night until I'm on them. If they were crossing the road instead of walking right beside it, I dont' think I could avoid hitting them.
Observe the sign that says not to cross there (one on the other side of the median too btw).
Observe the road widens from 2 to 4 lanes right before where the accident occurred.
Observe that trees and bushes on the edge of the median to the left would have blocked Lidar until the car was within 50' of where the accident occurred.
Confirm the scene against the video with the sign that reads
" Begin right turn lane - Yield to Bikes. " Understand that it refers to bikes in the bike lane on the right.
Pull up a top down view and get a ruler and note that the street lights are about 120' apart here. They are much closer in my area ( 50-100' apart).
(Also, if you look up the light pollution map, the area to the right of the road is very dark).
Go 600' back down Mills road and observe the 45mph speed limit on this road.
It's a terrible accident. The road widening like that with bushes and small trees blocking lidar, the pedestrian walking across the road without even looking for oncoming traffic (because it was late at night on a sunday in what looks like a kinda empty area so there probably isn't much traffic).
Wait for people to really dig into this. Don't make a snap judgement.
I'm sorry someone died, but there has been a lot of bad information and a lot of people rushing to judgement before they have the facts.
An A.C. said: "A local politician (from a very rich and Republican district in an otherwise Democratic county) once said: "If you're under 30, you have no business being anything but a Democrat; over 40, and you have no business being anything but a Republican."
As a person who is (well) over 40, let me assure you that being a republican is almost suicidal for 95% of the population.
An increasing number of older people are committing suicide. Especially white males. But they keep voting Republican, god luv um.
There's always one. Probably from Google (currently being sued by over 200 people including one their automated software picked 4 times only to be rejected by young managers). You know, google employees have posted here in the past that old people wouldn't fit their culture.
Something familiar about that statement..
"Women won't fit our culture" "Blacks won't fit our culture" "Irish won't fit our culture"
We need to bust these companies. but also we need to move health care away from companies. A young employee costs the company much less than an old employee and it creates a perverse incentive to lay off older employees. There are other reasons, but that one would be easy to fix. National health care also helps older people, and younger people (who are sick), to start their own businesses.
Part of it is simply oncoming automation.
Part of it is simply much lower wages in other countries.
It is a complex situation. But I know a lot of *50* year olds who got laid off and never worked in the field again. Some still were not working 5 years later.
Listen up young folks- I started saving *hard* at 33. I lived on half of what I made after I saw this stuff happen and after i went thru a struggle with cancer. I retired at 51. My date was one day after my corporation laid off 500 people and went to Infosys. I kept it close to the vest and they had no idea why I was so happy (severance and unemployment free on top of my already sufficient retirement). Be in the same boat. Keep working on your skills but save hard.
I think age discrimination is going to get much worse as automation increases. And safetynets are already being cut by Republicans. I don't know why *anyone* who wasn't wealthy that was over 40 would vote republican for any reason outside of guns and abortion. It's like slitting your own throat. But I can respect people who vote republican because they are opposed to abortion (even tho I'm not opposed myself). The guns have gotten a bit more iffy. Gun enthusiasts are supporting weapons with killing power exceeding that of weapons we already ban or regulate heavily. If gun enthusiasts don't get reasonable, they are going to lose big after a few more massacres of children.
You can confirm with the "begin right turn lane- yield to bikes" sign (yea I know...but that's for bikes in the bike lane tho darkly ironic). It's visible in the video just before the accident at 7 seconds.
No. It's been said since that the uber car was *not* speeding. CNN said the speed limit in that stretch of road is 40mph.
Look uber is a scumbag, scamming, cheating company. It sucks that this happened with one of their cars because it is hard to trust the information, video, etc.
When I trace back south, I get to a 45 mph sign, however the other side of Mill is 35 mph, and that sign is easier to find; a natural mistake, I expect. In CA, and I expect AZ, a divided road is considered two roads, which can have different speed limits. So the limit on the Uber car was 45.
If that doesn't get you there, try 642 N Mill Ave, Tempe, AZ, turn on satellite, and zoom in.
Looking at the satellite image, several decorative brick strips go up to the curb, repeated on each side of the road. A bus stop is on one side. While these are probably not legal crosswalks, the breaks in the median vegetation make a strong case that they are used as such."
So, per the signs available for that side of the road, the speed limit was 45mph (and you can follow the link above to verify that for yourself personally).
Also, there are several "false" crossings between the divided road where the median is bricked but they have signs saying "do not cross here". The state probably should put up fences or remove the brick or remove part of the brick and plant bushes to block passage.
You cannot stop a car in 10 feet. Not even 30 feet. You can not change the laws of physics (i.e. friction and velocity). You can't improve human reaction time.
And it is also a reference to a star trek song, just in case you missed that too./facepalm.
Another poster said this area is under the effect of light pollution laws.
If it was misting, the street light would have actually blocked seeing things past it until you were well into it.
Some humans have better eyes than cameras but that declines with age. I used to be fine with 60 watt/800 lumen bulbs but now I have to use "75 watt"/1100 lumen bulbs (and sometimes more of them) to see as well and I have more difficulty driving at night. I'm in my 50's.
The human driver was apparently looking at the instruments (could have been texting but I haven't seen any official source say that and I have seen official sources say the driver was checking the instrument panel.)
At 40mph (and the car was doing 38mph), stopping distance is 118 feet.
Of which about 37 feet is "thinking" time.
--- BTW, I watched the video and the first viewing with my hand on the mouse, i was unable to pause the video before it cut away from the collision. On a second viewing, I paused it about 10' away. On a *third* viewing, knowing I was looking for the sneakers, I was able to pause it 30' away. So I would have definitely hit the pedestrian.
I've been in this situation many times but they were walking on the side of the road, not crossing it. They just appeared out of no where.
And in this case, the pedestrian wasn't looking towards the car. She was intent on crossing the road and wasn't even aware a car with it's headlights on was approaching.
I think the streetlights may have contributed- especially if there was moisture in the air. They may have created a wall of light there which hid the car and hid the pedestrian from each other.
I'm wondering if the street lights contributed to the problem. They are very bright and the area behind them is dark. They could have hidden the area past them until you were passing them, Especially if there was any moisture in the air.
OTH, the pedestrian wasn't even looking in the direction of traffic and didn't seem to be aware of an oncoming car with it's headlights on. That was odd too.
Cars have headlights. Unless it was on the other side of a hill or around a corner, then the pedestrian would have seen the car if they had looked towards oncoming traffic.
However- it was late, the road was probably lightly used, and the pedestrian was focused on getting across it. Perhaps they had crossed the road many times before without a problem and so they had become less cautious.
The laws vary by state, but generally a pedestrian crossing the street which has controlled crossings and an uncontrolled location will be found at fault.
In this case, the pedestrian wasn't even looking towards oncoming traffic. She was focused on getting across the road.
My first viewing, I was unable to pause before the collision cut.
My second viewing, I was able to pause about 10' from the pedestrian.
My third viewing, looking for the sneakers because I knew to look for them, I was able to stop about 30' from the pedestrian.
That fits your 1.5 second estimate.
The pedestrian isn't even looking in the direction of traffic.
I wonder if the street lights were "low spill" lights.
I wonder if the street lights were blinding the camera and the driver to what was in the darkness beyond them.
The video is dark. It is Uber. They are scammy as hell. It's possible they messed with it before release. But it's also possible that the street light was a big factor in why the pedestrian wasn't visible sooner.
My first viewing of the video, with my hand on the mouse, over the pause button, I was unable to pause before the video cut from the collision (so I wouldn't have even been able to break).
Second viewing went a little better, I managed to pause the video about 10' away. At that speed, stopping distance was another 70'.
Third viewing, I was looking down- specifically for the tennis shoes. This time, I was able to pause/brake about 30' away. So I would have plowed thru her and gone another 40'.
Why is it so damn dark in that section of road? There are lights just before it- are they blinding the camera? Would they blind a human driver the same? or are the lights "energy conserving" bulbs and they are literally only lighting a small patch below the fixture with no 'waste" light around it?
Also, it highlights a basic problem. Humans are sloppy after a period of time. The human driver wasn't being hyperventilate like most people watching the video. She had been in the car for weeks without incident and was paying partial attention.
Also the pedestrian wasn't even *looking* in the direction of traffic. She was totally focused on her destination. Didn't even hear the car coming apparently. She was completely unaware of the car. If she had been looking it would have been easy for her to avoid being hit and it was easier for her to see the car than for the car and passenger to see her.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah fair point there.
On china, EV sales there are ramping up rapidly. Of course, it won't be teslas as they are too expensive for that market.
https://cleantechnica.com/2018...
That's odd. He's on track to ship about 0.66% of the cars for next year. (120,000 compared to 17 million)).
Perhaps your production numbers are out of date?
https://www.statista.com/stati...
https://www.statista.com/stati...
https://www.statista.com/stati...
Ramping up sharply too. On track to ship 360,000 vehicles in 2018 even if there were no further production improvements.
At the least, when you answer an email, that begins a quarter hour of paid time. More if answering it takes longer.
When you answer the phone, same thing. And more if you were woken up. At least a half an hour.
With an option for the company to let you take comp time during normal hours to avoid having to pay for the time. (And of course escrow money to pay for any time outstanding if you are fired or laid off).
Well, first. yes.
Second, the app is tied to a particular name and debit card and you can't load it until you are within a couple hundred feet of the theater.
Third, Their sites and app didn't work for me when I tried to sign up a couple weeks ago.
Fourth, it really is starting to sound "too good to be true". How can they charge $7 a month and offer a service that costs up to about $300 a month?
Something smells. But I guess if you use it 10 times really fast when you first get it, then anything after that is gravy.
PopeRatzo said:
Guccifer 2.0, Cambridge Anal. and Species Jumping...
It's all coming together quite nicely. Trump lawyers heading for the exits is a good sign. Top law firms telling him, "Nah, we're good. Best of luck, Mr President". Hires a warmonger to be his new National Security Advisor. I'm old enough to remember when people said Trump hated foreign wars.
Trump signs the Democrats' spending bill and headed to Mar-a-Lago for a week. I know what he'll be watching on TV Sunday night. Best believe Melania's got a legal team combing over the pre-nup and the NDA. Stormy's got pictures and video. Karen McDougal's got receipts. Mueller's checking off boxes.
All this in the last three days. It seems like only last week that his third consecutive endorsee in a congressional election went down to defeat. Oh wait, it was just last week. Oh yeah, I forgot: Breitbart guys were caught on tape trying to bribe a lawyer to lie about his client. What am I forgetting?
#WINNING
--
You are welcome on my lawn.
----
Yea, I swear to god a week in the Trump presidency is like a presidential dog year. He has more scandals in a week than most presidents have in a year.
The whole market is just above long term support now. If it drops 1% more, it could set off a lot of algo and technical trading that could take it down another 5% in a day or two. Hopefully at that longer term support, they'll start buying again. If that longer term support broached, there is no telling where the bottom is at that point.
The street lights just before where the accident occurred may have blinded the camera too.
Also the bushes and small trees to the left on the median would have blocked lidar and visual L.O.S. until she entered the road *and* the car was within 50'.
The road literally widened from 2 to 4 lanes right where the accident occurred.
https://www.google.com/maps/@3...
I don't see how an approaching car or human could have seen her before she was on the road.
I regularly (2-3 times a year) drive up on people who I simply do not see at night until I'm on them. If they were crossing the road instead of walking right beside it, I dont' think I could avoid hitting them.
Pull up google maps.
https://www.google.com/maps/@3...
Observe the sign that says not to cross there (one on the other side of the median too btw).
Observe the road widens from 2 to 4 lanes right before where the accident occurred.
Observe that trees and bushes on the edge of the median to the left would have blocked Lidar until the car was within 50' of where the accident occurred.
Confirm the scene against the video with the sign that reads
"
Begin right turn lane
-
Yield to Bikes.
"
Understand that it refers to bikes in the bike lane on the right.
Pull up a top down view and get a ruler and note that the street lights are about 120' apart here. They are much closer in my area ( 50-100' apart).
(Also, if you look up the light pollution map, the area to the right of the road is very dark).
Go 600' back down Mills road and observe the 45mph speed limit on this road.
It's a terrible accident. The road widening like that with bushes and small trees blocking lidar, the pedestrian walking across the road without even looking for oncoming traffic (because it was late at night on a sunday in what looks like a kinda empty area so there probably isn't much traffic).
Wait for people to really dig into this. Don't make a snap judgement.
I'm sorry someone died, but there has been a lot of bad information and a lot of people rushing to judgement before they have the facts.
An A.C. said: "A local politician (from a very rich and Republican district in an otherwise Democratic county) once said: "If you're under 30, you have no business being anything but a Democrat; over 40, and you have no business being anything but a Republican."
As a person who is (well) over 40, let me assure you that being a republican is almost suicidal for 95% of the population.
An increasing number of older people are committing suicide. Especially white males. But they keep voting Republican, god luv um.
Who posts there is no age discrimination.
There's always one. Probably from Google (currently being sued by over 200 people including one their automated software picked 4 times only to be rejected by young managers). You know, google employees have posted here in the past that old people wouldn't fit their culture.
Something familiar about that statement..
"Women won't fit our culture"
"Blacks won't fit our culture"
"Irish won't fit our culture"
We need to bust these companies. but also we need to move health care away from companies. A young employee costs the company much less than an old employee and it creates a perverse incentive to lay off older employees. There are other reasons, but that one would be easy to fix. National health care also helps older people, and younger people (who are sick), to start their own businesses.
Part of it is simply oncoming automation.
Part of it is simply much lower wages in other countries.
It is a complex situation. But I know a lot of *50* year olds who got laid off and never worked in the field again. Some still were not working 5 years later.
Listen up young folks- I started saving *hard* at 33. I lived on half of what I made after I saw this stuff happen and after i went thru a struggle with cancer. I retired at 51. My date was one day after my corporation laid off 500 people and went to Infosys. I kept it close to the vest and they had no idea why I was so happy (severance and unemployment free on top of my already sufficient retirement). Be in the same boat. Keep working on your skills but save hard.
I think age discrimination is going to get much worse as automation increases. And safetynets are already being cut by Republicans. I don't know why *anyone* who wasn't wealthy that was over 40 would vote republican for any reason outside of guns and abortion. It's like slitting your own throat. But I can respect people who vote republican because they are opposed to abortion (even tho I'm not opposed myself). The guns have gotten a bit more iffy. Gun enthusiasts are supporting weapons with killing power exceeding that of weapons we already ban or regulate heavily. If gun enthusiasts don't get reasonable, they are going to lose big after a few more massacres of children.
Okay, here is the 45mph speed limit sign less than 1000 feet before the accident. It may be less than 600 feet after the accident.
https://www.google.com/maps/@3...
And here is the spot where the accident occurred.
https://www.google.com/maps/@3...
You can confirm with the "begin right turn lane- yield to bikes" sign (yea I know...but that's for bikes in the bike lane tho darkly ironic). It's visible in the video just before the accident at 7 seconds.
No. It's been said since that the uber car was *not* speeding. CNN said the speed limit in that stretch of road is 40mph.
Look uber is a scumbag, scamming, cheating company. It sucks that this happened with one of their cars because it is hard to trust the information, video, etc.
Also (quoted from elsewhere)
"This article gives the location and that the car was northbound on Mill S. of Curry:
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com......
When I trace back south, I get to a 45 mph sign, however the other side of Mill is 35 mph, and that sign is easier to find; a natural mistake, I expect. In CA, and I expect AZ, a divided road is considered two roads, which can have different speed limits. So the limit on the Uber car was 45.
https://www.google.com/maps/pl...
If that doesn't get you there, try 642 N Mill Ave, Tempe, AZ, turn on satellite, and zoom in.
Looking at the satellite image, several decorative brick strips go up to the curb, repeated on each side of the road. A bus stop is on one side. While these are probably not legal crosswalks, the breaks in the median vegetation make a strong case that they are used as such."
So, per the signs available for that side of the road, the speed limit was 45mph (and you can follow the link above to verify that for yourself personally).
Also, there are several "false" crossings between the divided road where the median is bricked but they have signs saying "do not cross here". The state probably should put up fences or remove the brick or remove part of the brick and plant bushes to block passage.
Here's a picture of one of them.
https://cf.geekdo-images.com/m...
God. How dense are some people?
You cannot stop a car in 10 feet. Not even 30 feet. You can not change the laws of physics (i.e. friction and velocity). You can't improve human reaction time.
And it is also a reference to a star trek song, just in case you missed that too. /facepalm.
Another poster said this area is under the effect of light pollution laws.
If it was misting, the street light would have actually blocked seeing things past it until you were well into it.
Some humans have better eyes than cameras but that declines with age. I used to be fine with 60 watt/800 lumen bulbs but now I have to use "75 watt"/1100 lumen bulbs (and sometimes more of them) to see as well and I have more difficulty driving at night. I'm in my 50's.
The human driver was apparently looking at the instruments (could have been texting but I haven't seen any official source say that and I have seen official sources say the driver was checking the instrument panel.)
They were going to be big too.
I agree with your basic points but that stopping distance is much higher than what I've been taught and read many times.
http://www.drivingcrawley.co.u...
At 40mph (and the car was doing 38mph), stopping distance is 118 feet.
Of which about 37 feet is "thinking" time.
---
BTW, I watched the video and the first viewing with my hand on the mouse, i was unable to pause the video before it cut away from the collision. On a second viewing, I paused it about 10' away. On a *third* viewing, knowing I was looking for the sneakers, I was able to pause it 30' away. So I would have definitely hit the pedestrian.
I've been in this situation many times but they were walking on the side of the road, not crossing it. They just appeared out of no where.
And in this case, the pedestrian wasn't looking towards the car. She was intent on crossing the road and wasn't even aware a car with it's headlights on was approaching.
I think the streetlights may have contributed- especially if there was moisture in the air. They may have created a wall of light there which hid the car and hid the pedestrian from each other.
I'm wondering if the street lights contributed to the problem. They are very bright and the area behind them is dark.
They could have hidden the area past them until you were passing them, Especially if there was any moisture in the air.
OTH, the pedestrian wasn't even looking in the direction of traffic and didn't seem to be aware of an oncoming car with it's headlights on. That was odd too.
Cars have headlights. Unless it was on the other side of a hill or around a corner, then the pedestrian would have seen the car if they had looked towards oncoming traffic.
However- it was late, the road was probably lightly used, and the pedestrian was focused on getting across it. Perhaps they had crossed the road many times before without a problem and so they had become less cautious.
Yup, you are correct.
The laws vary by state, but generally a pedestrian crossing the street which has controlled crossings and an uncontrolled location will be found at fault.
In this case, the pedestrian wasn't even looking towards oncoming traffic. She was focused on getting across the road.
My first viewing, I was unable to pause before the collision cut.
My second viewing, I was able to pause about 10' from the pedestrian.
My third viewing, looking for the sneakers because I knew to look for them, I was able to stop about 30' from the pedestrian.
That fits your 1.5 second estimate.
The pedestrian isn't even looking in the direction of traffic.
I wonder if the street lights were "low spill" lights.
I wonder if the street lights were blinding the camera and the driver to what was in the darkness beyond them.
The video is dark. It is Uber. They are scammy as hell. It's possible they messed with it before release. But it's also possible that the street light was a big factor in why the pedestrian wasn't visible sooner.
Car was going 38mph.
My first viewing of the video, with my hand on the mouse, over the pause button, I was unable to pause before the video cut from the collision (so I wouldn't have even been able to break).
Second viewing went a little better, I managed to pause the video about 10' away. At that speed, stopping distance was another 70'.
Third viewing, I was looking down- specifically for the tennis shoes. This time, I was able to pause/brake about 30' away. So I would have plowed thru her and gone another 40'.
Why is it so damn dark in that section of road? There are lights just before it- are they blinding the camera? Would they blind a human driver the same? or are the lights "energy conserving" bulbs and they are literally only lighting a small patch below the fixture with no 'waste" light around it?
Also, it highlights a basic problem. Humans are sloppy after a period of time. The human driver wasn't being hyperventilate like most people watching the video. She had been in the car for weeks without incident and was paying partial attention.
Also the pedestrian wasn't even *looking* in the direction of traffic. She was totally focused on her destination. Didn't even hear the car coming apparently. She was completely unaware of the car. If she had been looking it would have been easy for her to avoid being hit and it was easier for her to see the car than for the car and passenger to see her.
You kinna change the laws of physics, jim.
Well your "primary source" has problems with reality and using your opinion as a source is similarly unadvised.
No one cares about our discussion at this point and I certainly don't care about your opinion. Everyone has one and you have yourself too.
The car was not traveling 38 in a 35. that was the preliminary investigation. It turns out it was under the speed limit.
It also currently appears that it didn't "try" to stop because there was no time to do so (not even for a machine).