Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:More nation-wrecking idiocy (Score 1) 582

Then, 6-8 months later, the same people who said "there is no way I'm paying 10 quid for the privilege of driving in this congested city", begin to rationalize the cost, and start driving again.

So the obvious thing to do is raise the congestion charge.. Brilliant! Now rinse and repeat...

The concept works quite well for parking in San Francisco. There are no wild swings like the kind you describe because they don't raise or lower the price more often than once every 6 weeks, and then they don't raise it by more than 25 cents an hour or lower it by more than 50 cents an hour. Here is the pricing data data. Notice how the prices get more and more stable (the percentages next to the yellow circles) as time goes on.

One way to make the prices more stable more quickly would be to use what engineers call a PID loop.

Comment Re:hyperloop without the hyper or loop (Score 1) 216

Oh, they were public works projects ... paid for with bonds that the airlines agreed to pay, and are currently paying.

Do airports pay property taxes? No. Do ticket prices cover the full cost of air traffic control? No. Do ticket prices cover the full cost of TSA screening? Also no.

the airlines don't get to pull the eminent domain card.

Unfortunately, that is also false.

Comment Re:hyperloop without the hyper or loop (Score 3, Insightful) 216

HSR is a non-starter for most locations, IMHO. The cost is way too high for it to be functional.

If airports were cost-effective, airlines would build them. Airlines don't build airports; therefore, airports are not cost-effective.

If roads were cost-effective, drivers would pay the full cost of them. Drivers pay less than half the cost of the roads. Therefore, roads are not cost-effective.

So what's left? What mode of transportation pays for itself?

Comment Re:This speed limit is reckless (Score 1) 582

The fact that the large majority of drivers are reasonable and prudent is proved by the accident rate of cars on the road and how low it usually it.

Compared to what? Exactly how many crashes would make the crash rate no longer be low, and how would you objectively determine this number? The answer to this question is important in determining whether the rate if crashes is truly "low."

The 85th percentile rule is grounded in science.

From 1964, to be exact, before airbags and crumple zones reduced the need to avoid crashes.

Comment Re:This speed limit is reckless (Score 1) 582

According to the first link:

Use of the 85th percentile speed concept is based on the theory that: the large majority of drivers: are reasonable and prudent

Unfortunately, 80% of participants in one study rated themselves as above-average drivers. This disproves the above theory that "the large majority of drivers are reasonable and prudent."

So the rationale behind the 85th percentile rule doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

If you have any further doubts that traffic engineers are raving lunatics, please watch this short video created by a recovering engineer. It's absolute madness.

Comment Re:What Type of Truck? (Score 1) 223

my grandfather has spinal damage - he can't get into or out of standard modern cars. He HAS to have a van, truck, or SUV that he climbs into, not moving down into.

That makes him a good candidate for a personal mobility device such as a Segway. If only we still built neighborhoods like the one he grew up in, where you didn't have to drive to the grocery store just to buy a gallon of milk, then a Segway would make more sense.

Comment Re: Fools think this is horrible. (Score 1) 442

People get stuck in welfare and can't get out of it.

That's not surprising when welfare is more or less dependent on the recipient not having a job.

Learn how money works, get good at math, learn how to step up, anyone can do it...

Except, as explained above, when you're worried about where your next meal is coming from.

Comment Re: Fools think this is horrible. (Score 1) 442

the poor tend to do more things that are stupid and land them in court in the first place.

Have you ever noticed how it's difficult to think about something when you're worried about something else?

The poor have more things to worry about than the rich, so asking them to make wise decisions when they don't know where their next meal is coming from is like that old saying, "the beatings will continue until morale improves!"

So rather than blaming them for making unwise decisions, it would be more helpful to lighten their cognitive burden in order to give them a better chance to make wise decisions.

Slashdot Top Deals

The IQ of the group is the lowest IQ of a member of the group divided by the number of people in the group.

Working...