Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:More nation-wrecking idiocy (Score 1) 583

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.

User Journal

Journal Journal: Rant: Android namespaces and ids 3

I hate Java, i hate Android development, but i repeat myself. And that's exactly what i hate about them.

In Android, objects have their own namespaces, under R. There's R.class, R.mipmap, R.layout, R.color, R.integer, and many more. So, the namespace of the layout (where you usually add objects) is under R.layout, the image on a button can be under R.mipmap. Nice.

Slashdot Top Deals

After Goliath's defeat, giants ceased to command respect. - Freeman Dyson