Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Solution (Score 1) 651

I could see it going either way. What seems to be undeniable, though, is that even if it is more expensive for the long distance, it's not the same "type" of expense. It's an expense that can be "fixed" by workers working "better." You know, the same way you can get more work done over here in the US by making people work 50-60+ hours a week, completely ignoring that doing so decreases the productivity of the worker over the course of all those hours, and that already lower productivity degrades even further from the exhaustion that sets in near the end of the 50-60 hour week. "We don't need more people, you guys just need to work more!" Bullcrap.

Comment Re:Facing your accuser (Score 1) 367

So...it's exactly the same as before, except before you could say to the cop "Did you see that guy tailgating me? I'm pretty sure he would have hit me had I slammed on my breaks to stop for that light," and he might let you off. If he doesn't and you want to argue further, you can take it to court. But the default position is having a chance to talk with the one accusing you before having to pay. With a cop, my extenuating circumstances can leave me with just a few minutes lost. A camera means hours of time plus court fees, minimum. So, really, not at all the same.

Comment Re:Cameras don't cause collisions... (Score 1) 367

Aren't you required to leave enough room to allow for such a situation? Not saying it'd be ALL your fault, but if I do something stupid and you are following too close to react when I do something stupid, it seems like fault would be shared. And being aware of what's behind you is exactly what I mentioned in the reply to the post above yours. If I'm aware that you are too close and cannot stop in time, it is my duty as a responsible driver to keep going, even if it means not quite making it before the red light. With cameras that cannot account for extenuating circumstances, I'm screwed whether I stop or go. That's what I mean by "responsible for the guy behind me." You driving irresponsibly could force me to deal with undesired consequences no matter what my choice, holding me "responsible" in some way for your actions.

Comment Re:Cameras don't cause collisions... (Score 1) 367

If the guy behind me is following too close to stop if I slam on my brakes, and I have to hit my brakes hard for a light with a camera, I have to choose between a ticket or a smashed back end. And while the smashed back end will end up being paid for by the person who hit me, that doesn't fix the fact that I won't get to my destination on time, I may have to deal with a rental car, I have to fill out paperwork for the insurance company, among other things that the guy behind me cannot fix. Sounds to me like I get punished either way simply because the guy behind me was doing something I can't control.

Comment Re:What's the deal-o ? (Score 1) 367

How are you going to confront a picture of you running a red light?

That's kind of the point they're trying to make. You can't, despite having a right to do so.

If you were making passage for a ambulance or policy vehicle, there will be witnesses and incident logs.

So you get to take a day off work to go into a court room, demand that the GPS logs of the emergency vehicles in that area be retrieved (assuming they even exist), show that your ticket was at the same time the emergency vehicle was going through, hope that the judge believes you that you really were making room and not just taking advantage of all the stopped traffic, and even if you do get out of the ticket, possibly have to pay court fees. All of which could be avoided if it were a cop on the corner instead of a camera. Sounds like a plan to me!

Comment Re:Facing your accuser (Score 1) 367

Except you get taken to court for those crimes. Red light cameras just result in you getting a ticket mailed to you with the expectation you'll pay. You want to fight the decision? You get to pay anyway, both court fees and with your time. Imagine if those bank cameras had facial recognition software that compared to a database of citizens, and the computer claiming a "match" was all that was necessary to throw you in prison without a trial.

Comment Re:Lead. (Score 1) 140

I haven't played any game since that felt as free and fun to play as WC and Descent. There was some close-to-fun stuff in one of the Startrek space combat games, but trying to use capships as space fighters isn't as fun (it's more strategy "target weapons, engines, etc.") Though I believe it could be done much better, the "StarTrek" name is detrimental since startrek doesn't use fighter craft in combat. (Star Wars on the other hand does, but Star Wars games are so pigeonholed to the "StarWars" universe that you don't get any 6DOF here either.)

Might I recommend Freespace and/or Freespace 2? Sounds like they might be exactly what you're looking for, and with the Freespace 2 Source Code Project the graphics have gotten a very nice upgrade (though both those games still looked good years after their initial release).

Comment Re:Smartphones do not make good gaming systems (Score 2) 140

It comes down to this: new game came out, you can either buy $200 portable system and pay $40 for the game or buy a $200 iOS device that will get a newer revision three times before the next portable gaming system comes out and download it to your iOS device for $10. Guess what most people will do?

Fixed for accuracy.

Slashdot Top Deals

The rule on staying alive as a program manager is to give 'em a number or give 'em a date, but never give 'em both at once.

Working...