One interesting experiment displayed how cell phones contributed to inattentional blindness in basic tasks such as walking. The stimuli for this experiment was a brightly colored clown on a unicycle. The individuals participating in this experiment were divided into four sections. They were either talking on the phone, listening to an mp3 player, walking by themselves or walking in pairs. The study showed that individuals engaged in cell phone conversations were least likely to notice the clown. This experiment was designed by Ira E. Hyman, S. Matthew Boss, Breanne M. Wise, Kira E. Mckenzie and Jenna M. Caggiano at Western Washington University.[24]
I postulate that paying attention to a display in the car instead of on the road is pretty similar to this. I rest my case.
Then perhaps the driver should be less inattentive. I doubt that focusing attention on a screen in the car instead of the road, and what's on it, is going to improve this.
You misunderstand what I am said. The current corner/dip/bend is always there but it's basically an extension of the NEXT bit of road which you should be looking at and anticipating. Yes, of course the current corner/dip/bend must be illuminated so that you can see what's there... but the headlights should not concentrate themselves on that corner/dip/bend because your mind has already processed pretty much all that there is to see; although your current reactions are fast-forwarding to what's coming next the current situation is, of course, always in your "peripheral vision" (I use that term because although it's not really a peripheral the term conveys what I am trying to say the most accurately). If the headlights decide to move, concentrate and highlight what you've already seen and moved on from then seeing and processing the next situation is compromised.
Did I say that you should outdrive your headlights? No! That would be insanity. What I said (or meant) was that by moving the headlights point of highlight (which according to the admittedly lacking articles) is the current corner/dip/turn the driver's concentration moves from looking ahead to what is already a committed action.
The system spotlights hazards for the driver with a spot and a stripe on the road surface and highlighted objects are displayed on the screen inside the car
So... the driver has to take their eyes off the road (where they should be looking) to look at the screen inside the car?
“Many people who drive at night have had to quickly react to someone or something suddenly appearing in the road – as if from nowhere. Ford’s Camera-Based Advanced Front Lighting System and Spot Lighting help ensure the driver is quickly alerted to people or animals that could present a danger,” said Ken Washington, vice president, Ford Research and Advanced Engineering.
Yes, and you won't be able to do that when you're losing 500ms to 15 seconds of potential response time by looking at the screen in the car.
It seems that the more Australia's BoM relies on computer modelling the worse their predictions become. Honestly the predictions of 15-20 years ago were more accurate than the BoM has been able to produce in the last decade or so.
[...] and uses GPS information for enhanced lighting when encountering bends and dips on a chosen route [...]
What about those of use who are really looking at least 1 turn ahead of the current turn/bend/dip? Nobody who can actually drive is actually looking at the current turn, so why highlight it?
The British used colonial North America as a penal colony through a system of indentured servitude. Merchants would transport the convicts and auctioned them off to (for example) plantation owners upon arrival in the colonies. It is estimated that some 50,000 British convicts were sent to colonial America, representing perhaps one-quarter of all British emigrants during the 18th century. The State of Georgia for example was first founded by James Edward Oglethorpe by using penal prisoners taken largely from debtors' prison, creating a "Debtor's Colony". However, even though this largely failed, the idea that the state began as a penal has stayed both in popular history, and local lore.[1] The British also would often ship Irish and Scots to the Americas whenever rebellions took place in Ireland or Scotland, and they would be treated similar to the convicts, except that this also included women and children.
It's bad. Seriously bad. And having lived in Australia all my life the only time I've tried Fosters was when it was on special and a good deal cheaper than beers that Australians actually drink, and I thought that I may as well give it a try. It's not as bad as Bud (yeah, not an Australian beer, just throwing it in there for comparison) or anything but it's pretty bad. Nobody I know drinks Fosters and I've never seen Fosters in an Australian's home fridge (and I do hang around all classes of Australians not just the ones who drink boutique beers). I'm not a beer snob or anything but if something tastes like shit I am not going to buy it no matter how cheap it might be. If it was cheap but acceptable then sure I'd keep it in my fridge for entertaining guests, but it's not acceptable and if I gave Fosters to people for free they'd laugh at me.
The one thing I've never done is actually research how Fosters became known as a beer that Australians drink. I might do that now... the story has got to be interesting. I guess.
Let me first state that you were well within your "rights" to moderate my above comment down. You, of course, are free to do what you feel is best. That said, I somewhat pity you, and at the same time it makes me wonder if you represent modern humanity as a whole. I'm not upset that you moderated me down -- I have karma to burn, and a silly number doesn't concern me in the slightest. What I am slightly dismayed about is that you thought the comment required down-moderation in the first place. To find humour in the most unlikely of places is what makes life fun. Life without humour is a lonely road to travel -- you'll just have to trust me on that one.
Perhaps you are young and have not learned to laugh at yourself yet, I don't know. But quite honestly once you learn to laugh at yourself you will find that you'll enjoy life much more. You (probably) only have one life, so make the best of it. Don't be so serious. Once you can laugh at yourself you will be able to find humour and enjoyment in the most trivial of things in a way that is not offensive to the others who may be affected. If they cannot see the good-natured and lighter side of things then their life might be pretty uninteresting as well. Laugh. Laugh at the mundane. Laugh at people's "seriousness". Laugh at living. Laugh for no reason at all. Have fun, because at the end of the day if you haven't had fun then you have led a life with less joy than I choose to live mine.
You know what else is funny? I've just given you another comment to moderate down! LOL
Umm, Crysis runs perfectly fine even on relatively low-end modern computers -- without even breaking a sweat. Either upgrade your computer from that thing from 2007, or find a new meme:p
Yes, well... pacman and the ghosts scared the shit out of me:( And I won't even mention the Commodore 64 version of Friday the 13th because I've blocked it from my mind. Maybe I should stay away from this VR.:(
I'm not 100% sure what you mean by this. But if you mean that you cannot use a password that you've used in the past then I have a problem with this... having something jump out and say "you can't reuse this password" actually gives something away: that you've used the password! Maybe you've also used that password on other sites so by saying "you've used this, you can't use it again" is actually, imo, bad for security.
If you mean that you cannot use a character in the password that you've already used then this is also bad for security... it allows an attacker to know that characters cannot be repeated and this, therefore, weakens randomness.
Oh, by the way, I did read the article. The author is obviously as stupid as a brick. Well, maybe the brick has more of a clue but it cannot communicate.
Absolve Verizon of customer service responsibility? How about just telling them that they failed and allow other ISPs compete -- perhaps with subsidies? Why absolve Verizon of anything at all? I don't understand that in the slightest. It's like rewarding them for failure.
Slashdot Mirror
Clown on a unicycle
One interesting experiment displayed how cell phones contributed to inattentional blindness in basic tasks such as walking. The stimuli for this experiment was a brightly colored clown on a unicycle. The individuals participating in this experiment were divided into four sections. They were either talking on the phone, listening to an mp3 player, walking by themselves or walking in pairs. The study showed that individuals engaged in cell phone conversations were least likely to notice the clown. This experiment was designed by Ira E. Hyman, S. Matthew Boss, Breanne M. Wise, Kira E. Mckenzie and Jenna M. Caggiano at Western Washington University.[24]
I postulate that paying attention to a display in the car instead of on the road is pretty similar to this. I rest my case.
It's called inattentive blindness
Then perhaps the driver should be less inattentive. I doubt that focusing attention on a screen in the car instead of the road, and what's on it, is going to improve this.
You misunderstand what I am said. The current corner/dip/bend is always there but it's basically an extension of the NEXT bit of road which you should be looking at and anticipating. Yes, of course the current corner/dip/bend must be illuminated so that you can see what's there... but the headlights should not concentrate themselves on that corner/dip/bend because your mind has already processed pretty much all that there is to see; although your current reactions are fast-forwarding to what's coming next the current situation is, of course, always in your "peripheral vision" (I use that term because although it's not really a peripheral the term conveys what I am trying to say the most accurately). If the headlights decide to move, concentrate and highlight what you've already seen and moved on from then seeing and processing the next situation is compromised.
Did I say that you should outdrive your headlights? No! That would be insanity. What I said (or meant) was that by moving the headlights point of highlight (which according to the admittedly lacking articles) is the current corner/dip/turn the driver's concentration moves from looking ahead to what is already a committed action.
The system spotlights hazards for the driver with a spot and a stripe on the road surface and highlighted objects are displayed on the screen inside the car
So... the driver has to take their eyes off the road (where they should be looking) to look at the screen inside the car?
“Many people who drive at night have had to quickly react to someone or something suddenly appearing in the road – as if from nowhere. Ford’s Camera-Based Advanced Front Lighting System and Spot Lighting help ensure the driver is quickly alerted to people or animals that could present a danger,” said Ken Washington, vice president, Ford Research and Advanced Engineering.
Yes, and you won't be able to do that when you're losing 500ms to 15 seconds of potential response time by looking at the screen in the car.
It seems that the more Australia's BoM relies on computer modelling the worse their predictions become. Honestly the predictions of 15-20 years ago were more accurate than the BoM has been able to produce in the last decade or so.
[...] and uses GPS information for enhanced lighting when encountering bends and dips on a chosen route [...]
What about those of use who are really looking at least 1 turn ahead of the current turn/bend/dip? Nobody who can actually drive is actually looking at the current turn, so why highlight it?
Do you live in America?
The British used colonial North America as a penal colony through a system of indentured servitude. Merchants would transport the convicts and auctioned them off to (for example) plantation owners upon arrival in the colonies. It is estimated that some 50,000 British convicts were sent to colonial America, representing perhaps one-quarter of all British emigrants during the 18th century. The State of Georgia for example was first founded by James Edward Oglethorpe by using penal prisoners taken largely from debtors' prison, creating a "Debtor's Colony". However, even though this largely failed, the idea that the state began as a penal has stayed both in popular history, and local lore.[1] The British also would often ship Irish and Scots to the Americas whenever rebellions took place in Ireland or Scotland, and they would be treated similar to the convicts, except that this also included women and children.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... (emphasis mine)
Strange that they let you stay there.
Pretty much anything but Fosters :-D
It's bad. Seriously bad. And having lived in Australia all my life the only time I've tried Fosters was when it was on special and a good deal cheaper than beers that Australians actually drink, and I thought that I may as well give it a try. It's not as bad as Bud (yeah, not an Australian beer, just throwing it in there for comparison) or anything but it's pretty bad. Nobody I know drinks Fosters and I've never seen Fosters in an Australian's home fridge (and I do hang around all classes of Australians not just the ones who drink boutique beers). I'm not a beer snob or anything but if something tastes like shit I am not going to buy it no matter how cheap it might be. If it was cheap but acceptable then sure I'd keep it in my fridge for entertaining guests, but it's not acceptable and if I gave Fosters to people for free they'd laugh at me.
The one thing I've never done is actually research how Fosters became known as a beer that Australians drink. I might do that now... the story has got to be interesting. I guess.
That's just not funny. Please. Learn to laugh it off.
That's my point. There is nothing that's funny (or everything is, depending on your point of view)
I find this funny:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I also find this funny:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
And also this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Many do not. So what's "funny"?
Dear Moderator,
Let me first state that you were well within your "rights" to moderate my above comment down. You, of course, are free to do what you feel is best. That said, I somewhat pity you, and at the same time it makes me wonder if you represent modern humanity as a whole. I'm not upset that you moderated me down -- I have karma to burn, and a silly number doesn't concern me in the slightest. What I am slightly dismayed about is that you thought the comment required down-moderation in the first place. To find humour in the most unlikely of places is what makes life fun. Life without humour is a lonely road to travel -- you'll just have to trust me on that one.
Perhaps you are young and have not learned to laugh at yourself yet, I don't know. But quite honestly once you learn to laugh at yourself you will find that you'll enjoy life much more. You (probably) only have one life, so make the best of it. Don't be so serious. Once you can laugh at yourself you will be able to find humour and enjoyment in the most trivial of things in a way that is not offensive to the others who may be affected. If they cannot see the good-natured and lighter side of things then their life might be pretty uninteresting as well. Laugh. Laugh at the mundane. Laugh at people's "seriousness". Laugh at living. Laugh for no reason at all. Have fun, because at the end of the day if you haven't had fun then you have led a life with less joy than I choose to live mine.
You know what else is funny? I've just given you another comment to moderate down! LOL
Oliver Goodenough, director of the Center for Legal Innovation at Vermont Law School
Next!
Umm, Crysis runs perfectly fine even on relatively low-end modern computers -- without even breaking a sweat. Either upgrade your computer from that thing from 2007, or find a new meme :p
Is that all?! That's a bit of a letdown.
Errr... wtf is a "homeless carriage"? (honestly, I've never heard of that term)
Yes, well... pacman and the ghosts scared the shit out of me :( And I won't even mention the Commodore 64 version of Friday the 13th because I've blocked it from my mind. Maybe I should stay away from this VR. :(
I just hope that automatic updates (water and food, for example) are provided.
Nothing can EVER be repeated
I'm not 100% sure what you mean by this. But if you mean that you cannot use a password that you've used in the past then I have a problem with this... having something jump out and say "you can't reuse this password" actually gives something away: that you've used the password! Maybe you've also used that password on other sites so by saying "you've used this, you can't use it again" is actually, imo, bad for security.
If you mean that you cannot use a character in the password that you've already used then this is also bad for security... it allows an attacker to know that characters cannot be repeated and this, therefore, weakens randomness.
LMFAO. I just read a bit about her. Perhaps she should play a little song to herself on her violin.
Oh, by the way, I did read the article. The author is obviously as stupid as a brick. Well, maybe the brick has more of a clue but it cannot communicate.
Absolve Verizon of customer service responsibility? How about just telling them that they failed and allow other ISPs compete -- perhaps with subsidies? Why absolve Verizon of anything at all? I don't understand that in the slightest. It's like rewarding them for failure.
Some of these sound like adult oriented entertainment sites such as Freshfromthefarm.
Make me an offer then...
Further, it seems that at phrase can be trademarked!(C)(R)(TM)(TLDR)
GoodJob.com
WellDone.com
GetFucked.com
TastyAndDelicious.com
DoneRight.com
TheRightWay.com
SoftestInTheSouth.com
TheTasteOfTheSouth.com
BackOff.com
SleepWell.com
GimmeTen.com
PerfectlyCrisp.com
SlowDown.com
WeCare.com
MadeToOrder.com
FreshFromTheFarm.com
FreshIsBest.com
TuckMeInAtBedtime.com
EnjoyTheFood.com
HaveAGreatTime.com
OneStepAtATime.com
CrazyCats.com
ThePenIsMighty.com (err... maybe that can be read incorrectly)
SoftAndFluffy.com
EasyOnTheEyes.com
LitigateDontMitigate.com
I guess that any common phrase can be "claimed". Weird.
That's not a particularly efficient sparse array implementation. Although I guess the question doesn't require efficiency.