Posts by Kiwi

Re: Warm human skin, please

Itvshoukd not be up to manufactures to baby sit drivers

I agree with most of your post, and even this to a degree. However, manufacturers (especially Tesla) are working hard to fill their cars with all sorts of gadgetry and other utterly rediculous and even dangerous stuff.

How many cars these days have the "entertainment" and "climate control" systems on touch-screen displays? Not so bad perhaps if you have steering wheel controls, very bad if you must ALWAYS take your eyes off the road to operate them.

My car - hand on gear lever outstretch index+middle finger, there's the volume control for the radio (also press that for mute). Move hand to the left a little and there's the controls for skipping the next track or radio station. Slide my fingers up gently and I'll find the SOURCE button to change from tuner to USB to bluetooth. All else I don't need while I am driving, and can stop and look. Oh, skip buttons also has the call answer and hang up should I receive a call while driving AND have actually turned BT on the phone on plus paired it.

Heater controls are similar - reach for the middle of the dash and then move hand depending on what I feel. Sliders or dials and physical buttons it all works the same, feel for what you need then twist/slide/press as necessary.

Putting these things into touch screens means I need to move my eyes away from the road, read the screen to determine what I am looking for, then tap the buttons. I am switching my brain from looking at the road to reading text, and it is going to take several seconds to adjust especially if I need to remind myself how to change modes or something else on the screen is a bit off.

It's not long ago that car makers were putting HUDs in (at least with speed) to help lessen the need for the driver to look away from the road. Now they're adding stuff that increases the likelihood of the driver's attention being diverted. While the driver should (if it is possible) chose another car, the manufacturers are still culpable for coming up with these designs.

(skirts)

USA has lots of decent engineers. They could easily deal with rough terrain.

There's a rather a high cost involved with that though, some of which is in removing some of the bits that actually help keep people awake!

You'll also have to fix every driveway (those that need it), every farm race, every railway crossing (this is the US, if that crossing had never had a crash then some twit decides to race a train and dies trying, those who made it a better and much safer crossing will be getting sued because obviously they messed up the crossing...), re-grade the tops of many hills and many intersections. Even just the camber of many small roads can be concerning. Maybe they should've been built better, maybe there's good reason for them.

Of course the use of smaller "feeder" trucks could be used to cover those areas and move goods to a larger depot or (my own personal preference) a railway depot - get the trucks off the road as much as possible.

There's a cheaper option. Drivers pay attention to the road. Bring back the idea that it's a bad thing to keep pushing yourself. Leave with sufficient time, pay attention, or go to prison. There is absolutely no excuse for poor driving behaviour - and yes I have done stupid things on the road and have made simple mistakes (including paying attention to the wrong hazard). I've also saved myself and others from being in a bad smash from doing the right thing.

And I've lost friends due to people making mistakes. There's a world of difference between someone crossing the centreline due to a moment's distraction and a drunk taking out a couple of boys walking to school.

Re: What's the point?

I mean really... How many stationary trucks have you seen in the middle of a highway waiting for cars to smash into the trailer bed at high speed?

I drive out in the countryside fairly often, and often through dairy country (lots of large milk tankers crossing highways). They are not stationery across the road but they are in the same circumstances as this incident - a truck slowly crossing the road.

Then there's tractors and other farm machinery travelling at 10-15mph on 60mph roads. They may be at the end of a long straight where you have plenty of visibility, and they may be just around the corner where you don't.

On any trip of more than 50 miles through dairy country? Almost certainly will see at least one tractor and one tanker or other truck pulling in to or out of a driveway.

By knowing this is a possibility in a rural area, and by driving to the conditions (including stopping distance and visible clear road) I can easily avoid these vehicles having an impact on my day. If for some reason I was so impaired that I could not see them, I would not drive.

Re: What's the point?

"Sliding under the truck as opposed to crashing into the side barriers seems unlikely to produce a different result at 68 mph."

----

It might have given the safety system something to detect.

Perhaps. Perhaps the "safety system" failed in that had it not existed, said driver would still be alive and said truck driver wouldn't be dealing with that sort of trauma.

perhaps the "safety system' could have been designed to do a quick check of the map - is there a bridge here? No? Then it's probably better to assume it's a truck. Is it moving? Probably not a bridge. Or if it is a bridge, it may be in a state of collapse.

And as this is not the first time a Tesla driver has died in this way, they need to do something to fix it. One death is more than enough but I get that we can't always think of all issues that could affect us - if the people responsible for this routine only drive in areas with skirts on trucks they probably had no reason to think of that, but now they do there should be efforts to get the car to actually measure the range to the object and measure the height of it. Hell, put a bloody sensor in the roof of the car that simply looks straight ahead - if that detects something lower than the top of the car start slowing down.

Not all areas can have trucks that have these side skirts. It'd take a significant change in the way we do things if that was to become fully mandatory. And there will be other times an obstruction occurs that is lower than the height of the car but not necessarily at ground level.

If Tesla are going to market their cars as self driving (they do simply by using the term "AUTO PILOT") then they need to make it see things that could cause problems and avoid hitting them. If their car cannot see a large object lower than the height of the car they need to shut the thing down.

Re: What's the point?

Drum brakes.

I always wondered if the "drum" in drum brakes more referred to the drum-roll heard at circuses and other places when someone was psyching themselves up to perform a rather dangerous (at least to the audience) stunt. And with many of the vehicles I've driven with drum brakes, at the delay they seem to have, I do think it's quite an apt definition! :)

Re: Stop this sort of accident

Please fit side impact bars on your semi trucks, see photo. SFW

Strangely, we don't have these on our trucks in NZ that often, nor do we have these sorts of accidents. We do have terrain that would make them an issue for a lot of trucks.

Re: What Tesla need to say is...

If the great and shiny future is fully automated and auto-piloted cars, then what's the real issue if a few dumb meatsacks sacrifice themselves on that altar for a few more grains of knowledge to make it happen.

One of, if not the biggest factor in ending a long-distance truckie's career is when someone dies in an accident with their vehicle. Hell, sometimes even with coming across a bad crash too often (which, given the distances and times these people operate, is quite likely).

I knew a train driver who'd been driving for 20+ years before someone decided the warnings were there to be ignored. He was never the same afterwards. Became much of a shut-in, struggled with all sorts of "survivors guilt" wondering if there was any way he could've prevented their deaths (he was on schedule, good driving conditions, working signals - car driver totally at fault). These sorts of accidents can take quite a toll on the drivers of the other vehicles, and on those who help out at the scene.

Also, when these cars crash they don't crash in a vacuum. There is potential for other innocent people to be involved.

Also terrible that in the US, trailer rigs aren't required to have bars between rear wheels to prevent exactly this type of accident with cars going under (such bars are obligatory in Europe)

Personally, I don't give a damn about the skirts on the side of trucks (not mandatory here, sometimes a problem due to the rougher terrain our trucks are more likely to traverse). The one simple feature that should be mandatory that would prevent these and most[1] other accidents is an attentive driver in a reasonably maintained vehicle. Punishments for inattention should fit the crime, and the crime is damned near "attempted manslaughter" (not quite the same as "attempted murder". Cop sees someone texting while driving? That should be that for their freedom for at least a couple of years. Sorry, hate prison but until people realise that not paying attention while driving comes with serious consequences, make some bloody examples of people. The sort that has your kids crying in terror (or laughing with glee depending on your parenting skills) because the parent who is driving is likely to be locked up for a few years. Make it career-ending, your boss won't want you doing it and if you're seen by anyone at your firm or any customer you're without work and without income for yourself (support your family but let you starve - fostering your kids out to decent carers might help).

And where it's a car's console or computer that's at fault, make damned sure the company and especially the upper exces feel it. I often turn the radio off (if it's on) when I am in trickier situations. I have a big knob that I can easily reach for, but many modern radios only have touch screens where you have to look away from the road to have a hope of operating it. They also do this for heater etc controls. Alternatively, link it to the GPS so the controls cannot be changed while the vehicle is moving.

If it distracts the driver, get rid of it (including any assistance that reduces driver attention (not counting stuff that aids when the driver is impaired (momentarily or otherwise). If the distraction is a factor in a crash, punish the execs as well.

[1] Mechanical failure can be hard to predict, as can landslides and various other things - but in more than 99% of the time it is the driver who fails - either failing to see what is going on, failing to stay in the correct place, of failing to take appropriate action when things go wrong!

Re: Autopilot and driver's attention

Common usage of the autopilot is in the plane. Ask the passenger if they think the pilot and co-pilot can get pissed and make party with the flight attendants while having auto-pilot enabled.

The passengers won't be amused by that.

Long long long ago passengers (usually children) used to be invited in to see the cockpit of airliners.

I was one such fortunate on an international flight (NZ-AUS, some time 1989-1992 - can't recall which trip). The crew were chatting with me, attendants and each other. There was no active control of the plane. I am certain had something become an issue they would've been on the ball at once, but for those few minutes I was there they weren't flying or even watching (though at cruising speed, another plane would go from tiny spec to sharing your exact airspace in like .3/sec).

Pretty sure none of the passengers gave a damn, except those who didn't get invited forward. Most probably assumed the plane had been on autopilot almost the entire trip and the only reason there was a person in the cockpit is they need someone to be able to say "Ladies and gentlemen, this is your captain speaking.....".

Re: what does a plane autopilot do?

Autopilots were not programmable in their early years.

No, but pilots are.

Re: What's the point?

In which case there is zero need for "driver aids"

I partially disagree.

I've driven in traffic where some twit pretty much rides the brake. It is difficult to tell if this time they're using the pedal as a foot rest or if they're slowing gently, or braking hard. After a few thousand times of them not actually slowing down, you automatically distrust their brake lights. A tool that uses methods other than my eyes to alert me to how rapidly the car ahead is braking would be helpful.

I tend to give myself enough distance but a moment's distraction (eg checking the mirror/blindspots to see if it's safe to change lane) at the wrong time can quickly lead to disaster.

We humans have at least a 1 second reaction time, and often it is slower. Anything that can be on the brakes before us is helpful. Something that beeps and gently applies the brakes is going to significantly reduce emergency stopping distances as by the time I am ready to respond, there is already some loading of the front wheels and my sudden stab at the brake pedal is going to work better with this than without.

And one of the best aids I have is the GPS. Despite nearly 30 years in this area there are still many roads I simply haven't learned, and I also often travel to places I have seldom been, or never been before. The GPS audibly tells me where I need to go, and sometimes I can glance at the screen to get an idea when I need to be looking for a different lane or for other road information. No, I do not rely on the GPS to tell me what the road is doing - that is the job of my eyes, ears and nose (yes, as a motorcyclist my nose is an important tool in telling me about the road conditions) - but it saves me having to take my eyes off the road for a map or to look at street signs.

Not all aids are bad, but some should be quietly taken out the back and shot. Followed by their designer.

Re: Allow me to remind you

"If the US really believes that China is violating WTO rules, then there is an existing mechanism to handle that"

The existing mechanism is a joke and takes years to get anything done. Trump's method seems to be hitting the nail on the head much faster.

Only it's a screw, not a nail, and it's getting wrecked.

When you're bozo the groping clown everything looks like something you want to nail....

Re: Allow me to remind you

"It gets even stupider with the twits who go to Ali Express, Amazon etc rather than using local firms (from a Kiwi perspective)."

For everything I buy, I buy from the most local producer that I can. But there is a wide swath of things that there are no local producers at all for.

I'm much the same. Priortise on made near me, made in my country, made by a locally owned company, made by a NZ owned company, sold by a local/NZ owned company, sold by somewhere overseas.

Quality and price can come in to it - but there has to be a significant price difference or quality difference for me to choose non-local over local. I'm also quite happy to wait patiently for stuff. There really is very little I need "right now".

But I am one of these stupid people who will pay $70 and wait 3 weeks for a well-made part that I could get in an untested Chinese made version for $50 and wait one week off ebay. Then again, I have known people who've come to grief with the cheap Chinese stuff.

I do have bits of cheap Chinese stuff in my loaner and road toolboxes (so if it gets nicked so what? Serves them right if it snaps on them and hurts them!), but that was simply a matter of buying what I could afford at the time, and as I get better quality stuff I put the lower quality stuff into other boxes.

Re: Allow me to remind you

"None of the big-box "auto enthusiast" car parts stores sold them or even had staff who knew what they were"

Even if they did, the big-box stores are almost certainly buying them from Chinese manufacturers, so that doesn't count as buying from a local producer.

If it's made locally then buy locally. If not, at least by buying from a local store I have it immediately and I help someone to eat locally. Especially if the company is fully locally owned even if they import most of their wares.

As mentioned above, the stuff you need is not stocked by the bigger firms because it's not common. At least with some real knowledge they know what I want and can order it in if they don't stock it.

The big focus on cheapness and convenience will only make "Idiocracy" a documentary. We're already seeing scary amounts of that today :(

Re: Allow me to remind you

"As a matter of interest what do you anticipate the impact to be when part of your domestic market becomes part of your international market?"

It wont. This is why I am happy to ignore a lot of crying and toy throwing from the cradle because a fair amount of it is nothing more than hot air.

Seen that..

NZ will always have it's ability to service large ships as we're too remote to go anywhere else and.. Wait, why are you buggering off to Singapore? Why is that tanker being towed by a sea-going tug? Why are our passenger ferries being drawn off?

At least we'll always have our airline service industry, one of the best and most respected in the world. Plus it's kind of a captive market, once they land if they need work they have to have it done here and.. Hey, where are all those planes going?

Oh well.. At least our local power infrastructure will be serviced by local companies, also world respected and.. What's this container load of imported switch gear doing in what used to be the factory floor?

NZ innovated very well and punched way above its weight because we had to. We were way too far from anywhere to get anything imported, so we either had to make it ourselves or make do with what we had. We had some of the best engineers and innovators, people used to taking a little and making it do a lot. We exported much of our technology and imported relatively little. We also had 0 unemployment and low crime rates.

But then shipping got cheaper and faster, and coms got much faster. We now have high unemployment, high crime, and most of our production has gone off-shore. Entire industries have disappeared from our shores and the products are now made in Chinese sweat shops. I saw a number of places suddenly sell up their local stake and ship all of their production to China. And as someone else pointed out, there was suddenly no reason to keep the head office here either. Oh, and the knowledgeful engineers and coders and the like? Well those who could speak Chinese got to stay on and train their replacements. Those who weren't able to train their replacements got an early redundancy package.

We do produce a surprising amount of "hot air" with our political aspirations and our "knowledge economy".

Used to be one person working 40 hours/week could easily feed a family of 5 and pay off the mortgage in 5-10 years. Now 2 people with no kids working full time and on >150K between them could just as well be sleeping in their car because they cannot find a place they can afford to rent.

If it can happen to a place as remote as NZ, there's a fair bet it can happen to your firm. Keep some spare boxes near your desk. Or do something to prevent following in our footsteps.

Re: Allow me to remind you

In the flooded basement scene, where the plumber says "If I ordered the part today.... which I wont..."

Oblig Dilbert

Re: Fascinating stuff

Tell me what you disagree with in the maths.

I'll put as much effort into that as you've put into seeing even just one way dust can be removed from (or not reach) a rock surface in an atmosphere-free environment.

For that matter, I haven't even seen any evidence of the alleged "dust-free rocks", but assuming you're right on the existence of the specific ones you refer to - well, I can think of a few methods which can make them free of dust. Got a link so I can see what it is of which you speak? I'd maybe be able to tell you with some specifics if I knew what you were actually referring to. If you're as capable of math as you imagine yourself to be, you surely should be able to come up with at least 3 methods by which the rock became or remained dust free.

Assuming it actually existed. Given your complaints elsewhere about the quality of the video, how can you be sure the dust was simply beyond the ability of the camera to capture it?

You've clearly not given any thought to this. Try again?

(PS, even after washing a rock on earth, it's still pretty difficult to find one that is truly "dust free" - it is actually easier for this to happen in space)

As to the Mythbusters episode - them at their worst was still better than anything I've seen from you on this topic. I don't watch much of their trash and only recall them doing stuff with life-sized things except maybe a re-creation of one of the photographs to show you can easily get multiple shadow directions with a number of objects strewn about a non-flat terrain from a singular light source (something anyone who has used a camera can quickly figure out)... Perhaps you can try again to debunk their debunking of your claims? Thought not.

Re: Fascinating stuff

A successful hoax on that scale would probably be as difficult to accomplish as an actual moon landing, though in a different way.

And of course there's that saying about if NASA had faked that, why haven't they faked any other significant achievements?

Anyway, we all know the moon is now a holographic projection made by Queen Victoria when she accidentally queefed in the original Moon's general direction and blew it out of orbit.