A 911 dispatcher is NOT a cop and has NO authority. Being told to leave the kid alone by the 911 operator means nothing in any legal sense.
Nobody is saying the 911 dispatcher has any legal authority. It was advice. Good advice. If he had followed that advice and stayed where he was we mightn't be in this mess now. At the very least there wouldn't be the public opinion that he put himself in a position where using his gun might be considered even remotely necessary.
Just because "you're not the boss of me" doesn't mean you shouldn't listen to the person offering the advice.
And is it still April 1 AM in Slashdot land? It ended 12 hours ago here...
Not possible. There is no timezone where April 1 ended 12 hours ago (you posted at 12:38 UTC), or am I missing something?
As AC pointed out we typically observe a midday curfew on April fools day in Australia, although I guess that's just a local thing. We also just finished DST and I misread the clock, it was actually closer to 11 hours ago... my bad.
In any case, when something like TFA pops up that seems stupid enough to be an April Fools thing but not that much stupider than other ideas I've read about i'm never quite sure, especially when the local time of the poster isn't given... I could RTFA but that's not the way it's done around these parts:)
The story at the link asks if this is available for cars. Yes! it is! and your car will travel just as fast as if you got out and blew on the back of it!
That's the dumbest thing i've ever heard. You don't need to get out of the car, you can just stick your head out the window and blow backwards. Just remember to turn your head 180 degrees to inhale. And do the opposite if you want to slow down.
Time isn't the issue for me. The issue for me is the fact that video "tutorials" feature voices that frequently grate on my nerves. Worse, the video tutorial cannot be quickly searched for the relevant information.
Seriously. I can find out if a text tutorial is relevant to the issue at hand in seconds. With video tutorials, I've typically closed the tab before the "host" finishes talking about how great he is, how great the software is, and what the tutorial is going to cover.
Is the term "tl;dw" in common use? It would apply to any video over about 30 seconds (or any porn video over 60 minutes).
Also, the car has much lower reaction times. So in some situations, it doen't really need to slow down
Reaction time is only part of the "stopping distance" equation. As I posted elsewhere, to reduce the risk of hitting a kid running out in front of you you may need to start braking before the kid actually starts moving towards the road. Impossible if he suddenly appears from behind a parked van, but not if you see him playing beside the road.
From what others have posted it seems like google have already considered the above though. And maybe better for when Kangaroo's leap out from the shadows at night as they tend to do.
The situations you describe are when the other party is, or could be, being a retard. If you were "Sharing the road" with a google car, you would be the other party. So by your own logic, you have nothing to fear if you are not a retard. And if you are, who cares what you think?
Retard avoidance is a big part of driving a car. It kind of bothered me when I read somewhere that the google car learns from other drivers - other drivers are idiots.
This is speculatory, of course, since there will have to be a review of driving law if this kind of thing becomes commonplace.
Interesting times ahead. For all my reservations, there will eventually come a time when a self drive car is better under all driving situations than the average road user, and the generation after that actually "driving" a car will be "retro" and a steering wheel will be something kids ask about when they see one in a movie.
Alternatively, by then kids will be plugged into their computers at birth and never move from their beds...
Driving home tonight there was a young kid playing quite near the road, so I dropped my speed in anticipation of him doing something stupid. He didn't, but I did wonder about the google car making those sorts of calls. I'm sure these google guys are pretty clever and have thought of all these things... are there any video's of self drive cars reacting to these sort of situations?
Like that feeling you get when you see someone else on or near the road and you aren't completely sure that they have seen you and you react by lowering your speed to avoid a potential collision. It's got me out of trouble a few times. If there was an accident you probably wouldn't be at fault, but you've gone one better and seen the accident coming and avoided it.
I'd want to see lots of video evidence of a self drive car doing this sort of thing before I'd be happy sharing the road with one.
This suggests to me that there is no ROI on this method, or at least none that could not be more cheaply matched by simply tilting existing solar arrays [pureenergysolar.com].
I could think of isolated installations where a tilting mechanism could be considered unreliable enough that it is too much of a risk to use (assuming you are talking about dynamic tilting to catch both the morning and evening sun with higher efficiency, not just a permanent tilt which isn't particularly useful - if you tilt it to be perpendicular to the morning sun it won't catch any of the evening sun).
9-3 for me. I learned 10-2 but it's uncomfortable. I've got long legs so I need to rack the seat back all the way to be comfortable on the pedals, so 9-3 is about the best spot to be for holding the wheel.
I do think that any lower than 9-3 is dangerous, since it won't let you react very quickly since your hands are in a position where you have to think about what you're doing instead of just having things happen on reflex.
As I posted elsewhere, the default hand position only does you good if your car was driving straight at the time of impact. If you were swerving your arms probably aren't at your preferred 9-3 position anyway.
If everyone wore their seatbelts the government admits that we wouldn't need airbags. The advice to move our hands on the steering wheel is an admission that airbags are dangerous. How about we make ourselves safer and save some money and give up on airbags.
Airbags are indeed dangerous. It's a fscking bomb right in front of your face, and when it goes off there's a good chance that it will break your nose and give you one hell of a black eye. In certain types of impact they do more harm than good.
Of course, hitting your head on the steering wheel or side pillar at high speed is going to shatter your skull, so i'll take the airbag thanks. And seatbelts are compulsory over here (Australia) so our airbags work better. When you aren't wearing a seatbelt then your nose is going to be a lot closer to the steering wheel / dashboard when the airbag goes off!
The other thing to consider is that impacts at highway speeds are not particularly survivable, and if they are you will be more worried about how much brain is left in your skull than a broken or torn off arm. The sort of impact where a broken arm might be your biggest worry is where you've had time to hit the brakes and/or swerve before impact, in which case your hands probably won't be in your preferred "cruising" position at the time of impact anyway.
Depending on who discovers it, it might make us take a good hard look at the patent system when the patent holders start screwing over everyone who wants to do anything with it. Especially if the material can be manufactured relatively cheaply and a major part of the cost is the right to manufacture it.
Even more interesting would be if it was discovered in China or some other country with a (perceived?) history of disregard for foreign IP.
The technology itself will probably be interesting too.
So in conclusion: attacker gets all your outbound traffic in 20 minutes (and gets all your inbound traffic too if you use QoS). But somehow that's not "broken?" Either you've just got your head in the sand, or you're a black hat trying to convince potential marks to keep using WPA-TPIK.
I did say use WPA2 if you have it available, but the threat isn't as significant as you make out. Anything serious (eg passwords) would be secured by SSL or TLS, so what are you going to sniff? You certainly can't get hold of anything that you couldn't just as easily get hold of via intercepting the cable/dsl/fibre. A guy with a high visibility vest and a clipboard fiddling around in your comms pit is much less noticeable than someone parked in your street with a laptop for 20 minutes.
And the threat TFA is talking about closing requires that your wireless security would be broken enough to allow an outsider to use it. No currently known WPA exploits allow this.
So it's broken, but not completely broken, and certainly not broken in the context of TFA.
Slashdot Mirror
A 911 dispatcher is NOT a cop and has NO authority. Being told to leave the kid alone by the 911 operator means nothing in any legal sense.
Nobody is saying the 911 dispatcher has any legal authority. It was advice. Good advice. If he had followed that advice and stayed where he was we mightn't be in this mess now. At the very least there wouldn't be the public opinion that he put himself in a position where using his gun might be considered even remotely necessary.
Just because "you're not the boss of me" doesn't mean you shouldn't listen to the person offering the advice.
And is it still April 1 AM in Slashdot land? It ended 12 hours ago here...
Not possible. There is no timezone where April 1 ended 12 hours ago (you posted at 12:38 UTC), or am I missing something?
As AC pointed out we typically observe a midday curfew on April fools day in Australia, although I guess that's just a local thing. We also just finished DST and I misread the clock, it was actually closer to 11 hours ago... my bad.
In any case, when something like TFA pops up that seems stupid enough to be an April Fools thing but not that much stupider than other ideas I've read about i'm never quite sure, especially when the local time of the poster isn't given ... I could RTFA but that's not the way it's done around these parts :)
I wonder what would happen if you tried to donate $-50...
And is it still April 1 AM in Slashdot land? It ended 12 hours ago here...
The story at the link asks if this is available for cars. Yes! it is! and your car will travel just as fast as if you got out and blew on the back of it!
That's the dumbest thing i've ever heard. You don't need to get out of the car, you can just stick your head out the window and blow backwards. Just remember to turn your head 180 degrees to inhale. And do the opposite if you want to slow down.
According to slashdot this article was posted April 1... I'm not buying it.
Time isn't the issue for me. The issue for me is the fact that video "tutorials" feature voices that frequently grate on my nerves. Worse, the video tutorial cannot be quickly searched for the relevant information.
Seriously. I can find out if a text tutorial is relevant to the issue at hand in seconds. With video tutorials, I've typically closed the tab before the "host" finishes talking about how great he is, how great the software is, and what the tutorial is going to cover.
Is the term "tl;dw" in common use? It would apply to any video over about 30 seconds (or any porn video over 60 minutes).
Also, the car has much lower reaction times. So in some situations, it doen't really need to slow down
Reaction time is only part of the "stopping distance" equation. As I posted elsewhere, to reduce the risk of hitting a kid running out in front of you you may need to start braking before the kid actually starts moving towards the road. Impossible if he suddenly appears from behind a parked van, but not if you see him playing beside the road.
From what others have posted it seems like google have already considered the above though. And maybe better for when Kangaroo's leap out from the shadows at night as they tend to do.
The situations you describe are when the other party is, or could be, being a retard. If you were "Sharing the road" with a google car, you would be the other party. So by your own logic, you have nothing to fear if you are not a retard. And if you are, who cares what you think?
Retard avoidance is a big part of driving a car. It kind of bothered me when I read somewhere that the google car learns from other drivers - other drivers are idiots.
It would be nice if I didn't have to express my own road rage - that would look a little silly coming from the passenger or back seat
The rage expression module is an optional extra.
I don't know if there is but from what I understand, this thing is incredibly intelligent.
If it was truly smart it would stay in the garage and never come out. Driving is a curious game, the only way to win is not to play.
I asked elsewhere too... are there video's of google cars reacting to this sort of situation?
This is speculatory, of course, since there will have to be a review of driving law if this kind of thing becomes commonplace.
Interesting times ahead. For all my reservations, there will eventually come a time when a self drive car is better under all driving situations than the average road user, and the generation after that actually "driving" a car will be "retro" and a steering wheel will be something kids ask about when they see one in a movie.
Alternatively, by then kids will be plugged into their computers at birth and never move from their beds...
Driving home tonight there was a young kid playing quite near the road, so I dropped my speed in anticipation of him doing something stupid. He didn't, but I did wonder about the google car making those sorts of calls. I'm sure these google guys are pretty clever and have thought of all these things... are there any video's of self drive cars reacting to these sort of situations?
Like that feeling you get when you see someone else on or near the road and you aren't completely sure that they have seen you and you react by lowering your speed to avoid a potential collision. It's got me out of trouble a few times. If there was an accident you probably wouldn't be at fault, but you've gone one better and seen the accident coming and avoided it.
I'd want to see lots of video evidence of a self drive car doing this sort of thing before I'd be happy sharing the road with one.
This suggests to me that there is no ROI on this method, or at least none that could not be more cheaply matched by simply tilting existing solar arrays [pureenergysolar.com].
I could think of isolated installations where a tilting mechanism could be considered unreliable enough that it is too much of a risk to use (assuming you are talking about dynamic tilting to catch both the morning and evening sun with higher efficiency, not just a permanent tilt which isn't particularly useful - if you tilt it to be perpendicular to the morning sun it won't catch any of the evening sun).
9-3 for me. I learned 10-2 but it's uncomfortable. I've got long legs so I need to rack the seat back all the way to be comfortable on the pedals, so 9-3 is about the best spot to be for holding the wheel.
I do think that any lower than 9-3 is dangerous, since it won't let you react very quickly since your hands are in a position where you have to think about what you're doing instead of just having things happen on reflex.
As I posted elsewhere, the default hand position only does you good if your car was driving straight at the time of impact. If you were swerving your arms probably aren't at your preferred 9-3 position anyway.
If everyone wore their seatbelts the government admits that we wouldn't need airbags. The advice to move our hands on the steering wheel is an admission that airbags are dangerous. How about we make ourselves safer and save some money and give up on airbags.
Airbags are indeed dangerous. It's a fscking bomb right in front of your face, and when it goes off there's a good chance that it will break your nose and give you one hell of a black eye. In certain types of impact they do more harm than good.
Of course, hitting your head on the steering wheel or side pillar at high speed is going to shatter your skull, so i'll take the airbag thanks. And seatbelts are compulsory over here (Australia) so our airbags work better. When you aren't wearing a seatbelt then your nose is going to be a lot closer to the steering wheel / dashboard when the airbag goes off!
The other thing to consider is that impacts at highway speeds are not particularly survivable, and if they are you will be more worried about how much brain is left in your skull than a broken or torn off arm. The sort of impact where a broken arm might be your biggest worry is where you've had time to hit the brakes and/or swerve before impact, in which case your hands probably won't be in your preferred "cruising" position at the time of impact anyway.
Many racing cars don't even have a steering weel, just a T shaped handle.
There is not much of an option then.
Makes sense. You don't exactly turn the wheel on a racing car particularly far...
When something happens, I'll be in a giant flaming ball of fire, so I'll have other things to worry about.
Are you driving the last Pinto?
My car only has a digital speedometer. I don't need a display to tell me I'm accelerating. I can feel it!
Depending on who discovers it, it might make us take a good hard look at the patent system when the patent holders start screwing over everyone who wants to do anything with it. Especially if the material can be manufactured relatively cheaply and a major part of the cost is the right to manufacture it.
Even more interesting would be if it was discovered in China or some other country with a (perceived?) history of disregard for foreign IP.
The technology itself will probably be interesting too.
Now THAT is and interesting and insightful thought! What would be the equivalent defense strategy for males?
No reason why a burqa couldn't work for males too. I mean who'd know?
A Guy Fawkes mask would work just as well but it would be a bit of a stretch to claim it was part of a religious dress code...
Maybe those Muslims are just ahead of their time... are you allowed to wear a burqa in Japan?
I'm not sure if you are agreeing with me or disagreeing with me... there is still no good reason to use WPA+TKIP if all your devices support WPA2.
So in conclusion: attacker gets all your outbound traffic in 20 minutes (and gets all your inbound traffic too if you use QoS). But somehow that's not "broken?"
Either you've just got your head in the sand, or you're a black hat trying to convince potential marks to keep using WPA-TPIK.
I did say use WPA2 if you have it available, but the threat isn't as significant as you make out. Anything serious (eg passwords) would be secured by SSL or TLS, so what are you going to sniff? You certainly can't get hold of anything that you couldn't just as easily get hold of via intercepting the cable/dsl/fibre. A guy with a high visibility vest and a clipboard fiddling around in your comms pit is much less noticeable than someone parked in your street with a laptop for 20 minutes.
And the threat TFA is talking about closing requires that your wireless security would be broken enough to allow an outsider to use it. No currently known WPA exploits allow this.
So it's broken, but not completely broken, and certainly not broken in the context of TFA.