Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Not a fan (Score 1) 280

by jklovanc (#48899717) Attached to: Government Recommends Cars With Smarter Brakes

Under about 30 feet, you should be able to stay close to the middle of the road and avoid them, even if you don't accelerate, assuming a 9 foot wide lane.

Given 1 foot clearance on each side of the vehicle and a vehicle width of 5 feet gives a 3 foot clearance for the pedestrian. It the pedestrian is in the 3 foot area in the middle of the lane there is not enough room to go around. Many accidents are causes when pedestrians panic at seeing the approaching vehicle and stop in the middle of the lane.

At every cross walk, *you* should be looking both ways for pedestrians liable to cross.

You are assuming visibility is perfect at all crosswalks. There are many obstructions such as parked vehicles, telephone poles, other people, etc that obstruct your view of crossing pedestrians. If you add night, rain and/or dark clothing it gets even worse. In one instance I was traveling in the same direction as a pedestrian who was playing with his phone. He turned left into a crosswalk without stopping or even looking. How was I supposed to anticipate that move? Luckily I had time to stop. Had I been ten feet closer we would have hit.

I don't see how you can defend not stopping and looking before entering a crosswalk. Yes, some drivers need to be more attentive but some pedestrians need to be more attentive as well.

Comment: Re:Lift? (Score 1) 51

by jklovanc (#48899511) Attached to: NASA Considers Autonomous Martian Helicopter To Augment Future Rovers

if you rotate the blades 10x as fast as you do on Earth, you'll get the same lift.

Sorry you are off by a factor of 10. Ten time faster rotation means ten times the lift not 100 times.

That said, gravity on Mars is 1/3rd as much as Earth, so you only need 1/3rd the lift. So rotating the blades at 6x the rate you'd rotate them on Earth would be sufficient.

The more accurate numbers are 100 *.38 = 38. So the rotors would have to rotate 38 times as fast.

Comment: Re:Not a fan (Score 1) 280

by jklovanc (#48895551) Attached to: Government Recommends Cars With Smarter Brakes

Just because one technology has issues has no bearing on whether or not an completely different technology has issues.

As for your "attentive and skilled driver" point, there are times when that is not good enough. For example, I was driving at a 2 second interval behind a van. It made a quick lane change. In front of it was another van. It took me a second to realize that van was not moving. It had no lights showing at all. I nearly hit it A braking asist device would have kicked in immediately when it calculated that I would hit the stationary van.

Comment: Re:Not a fan (Score 1) 280

by jklovanc (#48895523) Attached to: Government Recommends Cars With Smarter Brakes

And so it's not uncommon to hear statements like he "came out of nowhere," when in fact the pedestrian was crossing legally.

The pedestrian may have been crossing legally but at a time where the driver could not stop. Say I am driving legal limit of 30 mph down the road. The typical stopping distance is 75ft. What happens if the pedestrian enters the crosswalk when I am less than 75ft away? The pedestrian may have the right of way but the vehicle still could not stop in time.

There was one instance where a police car was approaching with lights an siren flashing. A pedestrian though she could beat the police car by dashing across the crosswalk. She didnt notice the car ther the cruiser was chasing till it hit her.

I have seen too many stupid pedestrian moves. Crosswalks are not magic shields that stop all vehicles. What ever happend to stop and look both ways before crossing? Pedestrian need to take responsibility for their own safety.

Comment: Re:Not a fan (Score 1) 280

by jklovanc (#48895441) Attached to: Government Recommends Cars With Smarter Brakes

Yet the number of pedestrian fatalities has been rising.

I used to always blame the driver for hitting pedestrians until I had a couple of incidents with pedestrian texters.

In on case a pedestrian was waking on the sidewalk going in the same direction I was. He came to a perpendicular crosswalk and just turned left into it. He didn't stop or even look. Had I been ten feet forward I would have hit him.

In another instance I was looking for a parking spot and a girl walked out right in front of me from behind a truck. I stopped less than 2 feet from her. I ended up in line behind her at Starbucks and asked her about the incident. She never even knew I was there.

Another time I was travelling on a dark and rainy night. I was approaching a crosswalk and a person in very dark clothing came out from behind a power pole and strode into the street. I barely stopped.

There are too many pedestrians that are engrossed in their phones or iPods and do not look around. A vehicle can only avoid hitting a pedestrian if there is enough time. While the pedestrian may have the right of way it is always advisable to get eye contact with drivers before entering a crosswalk or intersection. You may be right but but you may also be dead right.

Comment: Re:Standard cop tactic in the USA (Score 1) 413

by jklovanc (#48881041) Attached to: Blogger Who Revealed GOP Leader's KKK Ties Had Home Internet Lines Cut

In Chicago, the internal affairs division of the police is staffed mostly by ex-cops.

It s possible that those ex-cops are the ones that are pissed off at the bad cops for making them look bad.The more people you report it to the higher chance something will happen. It is very easy to do nothing and then gripe about the incident happening. If you report it and nothing happens at least you tried.

There is one sure way of guaranteeing that internal affairs will never investigate an incident; Don't report it.

Comment: Re:Standard cop tactic in the USA (Score 5, Informative) 413

by jklovanc (#48878179) Attached to: Blogger Who Revealed GOP Leader's KKK Ties Had Home Internet Lines Cut

Did you report it to any of the following; local police board, state police board, prosecutor in the case? The prosecutor would be your best bet as they usually get pissed off when their witnesses are messed with. The prosecutor could charge the officers with witness tampering. Did you politely ask for the case number so you could refer to the incident later?

Comment: Re:Direct connect (Score 1) 199

by jklovanc (#48873193) Attached to: Insurance Company Dongles Don't Offer Much Assurance Against Hacking

So bypass the hard parts by soldering into the circuits and then say the device is insecure. We have no idea how many layers they bypassed. This is like entering the bank, shutting off the alarm with the code, opening the vault door with the combination, drilling a few safety deposit boxes and then saying safety deposit boxes in banks are insecure.

If you need physical access to the dongle it is not a true exploit of the dongle.

Comment: Shutter (Score 4, Interesting) 322

by jklovanc (#48868661) Attached to: What Will Google Glass 2.0 Need To Actually Succeed?

A visible physical shutter that can be moved over the camera lens to prove that one is not recording video. I realize that it does not deal with people not near enough to see the shutter but at least it will put the people at the table at ease. This is not a perfect solution but it might help.

Comment: Hype (Score 3, Informative) 41

by jklovanc (#48866985) Attached to: Microbots Deliver Medical Payload In Living Creature For the First Time

The motors made their way to the mice's stomachs, embedded in their stomach linings, and released their tiny payloads: nano-size flakes of gold.

No, the motors were swallowed by the mouse where they interacted with the acid in the stomach and began to move. Some of them eventually encountered the stomach lining where they embedded themselves. There was no payload release.

The research represented a major step toward putting microbots to work in human medicine, where they could one day ferry drugs efficiently into specific organs or even specific cells.

These are motors with a payload not microbots.
Here are a few issues;
They only work in an acid environment.
This method could not be uses in blood supply as it produces gas which could cause an embolism.
They have no way of discerning where they are. To deliver a drug to a specific point that is necessary.
This may be a step to delivering drugs to the stomach or intestines but not really applicable to the rest of the body.

The herd instinct among economists makes sheep look like independent thinkers.