Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Trains (Score 1) 165

by drinkypoo (#49630779) Attached to: Self-Driving Big Rigs Become a Reality

Right, you can't use rail unless you have high utilization, and you can't have high utilization if the rail doesn't do the job you need to do, or if the public transportation systems along the rail line don't work. That's why PRT makes more sense than rail for most trips, and why we should use classic rail only for long hauls and PRT for short trips.

Comment: Re:No single payer (Score 1) 307

by Qzukk (#49630661) Attached to: The Medical Bill Mystery

I know I do.

Yeah, I can imagine you sitting there after a car wreck, horribly mangled, holding onto consciousness just so you can make sure that they take you to the best hospital. Wait! Is this ambulance fully accredited and received at least an A rating from Consumer Reports? No? Well, I'll just wait here for one that is.

Comment: Re:Trains (Score 1) 165

by drinkypoo (#49630523) Attached to: Self-Driving Big Rigs Become a Reality

Freight Trains, you know, the topic of this entire article?

Yeah, you can't build rail just for freight, because it won't see enough utilization. It has to carry passengers, too. You can't take the efficiency of the freight-carrying system alone because it doesn't operate alone, it's dependent on being part of the passenger-carrying system (and vice versa.)

Comment: Re: nonsense (Score 2) 307

by Rei (#49630453) Attached to: The Medical Bill Mystery

Really? We in countries with single payer are clamouring for a system more like America's? That's fresh. America's healthcare system is a boogieman concept here, the sort of thing that one scares voters with - "my opponent's policies will make out healthcare system end up like America's!" Even conservative Americaphiles are usually scared of it.

Comment: Re:I for one welcome our truck driving overlords (Score 1) 165

by drinkypoo (#49629515) Attached to: Self-Driving Big Rigs Become a Reality

I am well aware of the concept of irony, but that was not the subject of my rebuttal.

It doesn't seem like you are particularly aware.

As it seems that you are more interested in playing word games rather than discussing the subject at hand

Hypocrite. I am discussing the subject at hand, with people who are doing better than playing clever word games. The "or not" in my comment addressed the point before you raised it: namely, that drivers might not in fact observe the information provided by local signage. So if you have anything to add, rather than ignoring what I wrote, that will elevate you above "clever word games".

Comment: Re:nice edit (Score 1) 165

by drinkypoo (#49629375) Attached to: Self-Driving Big Rigs Become a Reality

Unless they can navigate ever present, always changing construction zones, those things will be useless in my state.

For now, a human driver will be on board to handle those occurrences. Later on, when regulatory acceptance is captured, they will be handled by a remote driver who operates the vehicle by telepresence. They will probably be located in regional service centers, organized into networks, and contracted by shipping lines which will be reduced primarily to corporations which own trucks and hire a manager, an accountant, and a receptionist who is occasionally replaced by a temp.

Comment: Re:I for one welcome our truck driving overlords (Score 1) 165

by drinkypoo (#49629343) Attached to: Self-Driving Big Rigs Become a Reality

Absolutely. But constructing an argument that is predicated on negating a sentence through the use of an easily overlooked two word suffix, does not enhance comprehension.

Tacking "...or not" onto the end of a sentence is an extremely common construct in American English, which denotes acceptance of irony.

Comment: Re:Subject's are dead. (Score 1) 165

by drinkypoo (#49629323) Attached to: Self-Driving Big Rigs Become a Reality

I would think that with increased stopping distances would mean farther forward camera's?

The long stopping distances should also mean lower speeds. some states limit speeds while towing, for example in California it is always illegal to exceed 55 mph while towing anything with any kind of vehicle. Of course, it's rare to see a big rig going less than 65 or 70 on any highway in California, so make of that what you will. Perhaps the self-driving trucks will obey the law in that regard, and as such do much better at holding their lane than human drivers — who I regularly see fail at this because they're driving faster than they ought to be. Regardless, the vehicles are much taller than others, so they clearly have a lot more sight range available...

Comment: Re:Idiots in passenger vehicles (Score 1) 165

by drinkypoo (#49629291) Attached to: Self-Driving Big Rigs Become a Reality

Having driven a large rig before I can assure you that usually the problem is NOT the big rig driver. It is the idiots in passenger vehicles who cut them off

I do see idiots in passenger vehicles cut big rigs off, but I have just as frequently seen assholes in big rigs cut me off. They pull over to pass as I am rapidly advancing which is already illegal, then they take a literally illegal period of time to execute the passing manouver (in California, if you're not actively overtaking, you must stay out of the passing lane, thankyouverymuchassholes) and then they often lag long after the truck they've passed has flashed their lights to denote permission to merge, just because they're assholes and they can. I also see big rig drivers with a dozen or more drivers behind them fail to use a turnout even on flat ground, which is also illegal in the state of California — when there are a mere five drivers back there, you are required to pull over and let them by, at the first safe opportunity, and not just the first marked turnout. And if I see a big rig hold its lane these days, it's the exception and not the rule. If you can't hold your lane at that speed then slow down, asshole. And if you then hold people up, pull over, asshole.

We all already know that the average truck driver is untrained and unskilled, so there's no need for you to bullshit us. Driver training was already an issue a decade ago because of a lack of experienced drivers willing to sell their life for shit pay, and it's only worse now.

When even half of the truck drivers out there start obeying laws intended to preserve public safety and to make the road usable for everyone, not just freight, then I'll believe your claims that the problems are mostly caused by other drivers. But frankly, you're completely full of shit.

Failure is more frequently from want of energy than want of capital.

Working...