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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:More nation-wrecking idiocy (Score 1) 560

I think you'll need to try again after you get some more sleep, that link doesn't even mention a left turn lane, it seems like it's talking about a road called Suicide Lane because there were 88 accidents there in 11 months, but no evidence that there was a "suicide lane" there that caused 88 accidents.

Searching for "suicide lane" accident studies gets me articles like this one where apparently the "correct" thing to do is to never allow anyone to ever turn left again because some old woman turned left without checking for oncoming traffic. Likewise "Police and engineers often deride such lanes as 'suicide lanes,' not so much because cars might collide head-on, but because they allow people to cross traffic anywhere." I guess walling off left turns forever resolves my question of whether having the turning lane is safer than having people stop in the "fast" left lane to turn left, though if you're going to go to the expense of installing a wall on a 7 lane road, you might as well give up and upgrade it to a ramp-access freeway with service/frontage roads and underpasses to get to the other side.

The more professional terms "bidirectional left turn lane" or "two way left turn lane/TWLTL" gets a few actual studies. This study says that it's hard to determine if raised medians actually stop wrecks compared to TWLTL or if they move them to the cross streets where people are trying to go around the median to get to the other side. It suggests that raised medians are appropriate for residential sections (like your picture) rather than commercial sections, and feedback from people and companies on proposed median treatments seems to mirror that, with business developers preferring two way left turn lanes to raised medians, and residential developers and residents preferring wide, landscaped medians to both TWLTL and small concrete medians. This study from the '70s likewise suggests that TWLTL are recommended for commercial development. I did find this study where someone complained TWLTLs are scary, which amused me since apparently "scary" is a reason to erase all the lines from the road, but also a reason to not allow people to turn left.

If I had to go around a raised median every day I left my house, I too would demand it to be a very wide landscaped median, so I could actually U-turn around it without having to execute a 3 point turn (this study recommends to plan for a 48 foot turning radius for passenger cars, like turning from an 11' lane around a 22' median with two 11' lanes on the other side ). I'm afraid the street you've got in your photo is just irredeemably fucked. Add frequent speed humps and set the speed limit to 15 MPH with active enforcement by a local sheriff hired with neighborhood association dues to convince through traffic to find some other way around.

Comment Re:Too late (Score 2) 221

This site really is a magnet for autistic neck beards. They scare women away with their creepyness and then blame it on social justice. Yeah some people on the other end are a bit "off" but you guys start up with death and rape threats further proving their point.

Comment Re:Huh? (Score 1) 60

3D printed objects aren't the strongest due to the way the layers are laminated together. I imagine the last place you'd want a weak join is on a 150+ foot long blade swishing through the air.

You betcha.

Especially since a spinning blade gets more efficient as it gets faster. Higher speed = lower torque for a given horsepower density, so a higher tip speed ratio (TSR) wastes less energy "twisting" the air downwind.

Efficient wind turbines run at a TSR of 6 or higher - which means that in windy conditions the tips are running at an appreciable fraction of the speed of sound.

If one of those puppies breaks off it's NOT the kind of baseball bat or boomerang you want coming toward you, whether flying or summersaulting along the ground. (Imagine a caber toss with giants and redwood logs.) Not to mention what the resulting unbalanced spinning does to the other blades and the pylon.

Comment Re:If it's "settled", it ISN'T "science" (Score 3, Interesting) 464

The people saying "global warming" are all paid to say "global warming" to get/keep Government funding, so that government can dictate to everyone (except rich n powerful) that we need to give up every technology that makes the world run.

The fact is, ever number has been fudged to get the results they are wanting, to prove what they need to prove, to keep getting funding to support something that has no basis except "consensus"

When every major prediction has failed, the the consensus cannot be right. I remember all those predictions of "worse hurricanes" followed by "almost no hurricanes", and "Polar Ice caps disappearing" only to have "polar Ice caps expanding (which is now the new "proof" of global warming), on down the line.

not to mention the Greening of Africa, when it was supposed to be getting drier and more desert like: http://news.nationalgeographic...

The problem isn't Global warming, it is that EVERYTHING is blamed on it. Ice growing or shrinking .. GLOBAL WARMING, more snow GLOBAL WARMING, more rain and greening in Africa GLOBAL WARMING!

In fact, global warming may in fact be good for the planet, even if it isn't good for Humans. ;)

Comment Re: Cool (Score 1) 169

My objection is that they are assumed "law" but never having been through the Legislature, cannot be "law" ... by definition. So the assumption should be "these aren't laws, more like guidelines".

The problem isn't executive orders, it is that they aren't really laws, but are still treated as laws.

Comment Re:How about this (Score 1) 569

Thanks for the correction, I meant to say "a year" but messed up. I think $50+ a year is way too high for most websites, especially Wired that I read infrequently...

Also think about it from the standpoint of magazines - you used to be able to subscribe to a magazine for $12 per year, which had a lot more costs (like printing) going on for a fair amount of content per month. Why should you have to pay substantially more than a magazine for the same amount of content?

I personally also doubt I'd pay $12/year for Wired at this point though, it's not the Wired of old...

Comment How about this (Score 1) 569

However, that 1 dollar a week thing... isn't it exactly what people here and elsewhere asked for?

I don't think many people have asked to pay $50+ a month for a website, or would be willing to pay that much...

What about some combination of payment and sensible ads? Let Wired sell ads that are just images, that link to an advertisers site. Few would object to that, they'd make less but that could be made up by a more reasonable subscription rate (like say $1/month).

Wired could even offer to give advertisers aggregate data for anyone that actually clicked on a ad, so they would not lose as much over traditional advertising... most people would not care, because is the UX abusing aspect of ads (like popover/unders) that really anger people.

Comment Re:If it's "settled", it ISN'T "science" (Score 1) 464

Gravity, from our understanding of Newton's laws, we now know Newton was wrong (technically) but close enough (approximately correct). We know this because Einstein's models are more accurate (and yet .. still not correct). The problem with science is that it evolves as we gain understanding. AGW has so many different variables in it, that it is bound to be wrong, and we can't even tell how wrong it is.

This is why people use terms like "consensus" instead of "proven", because quite frankly it is still hypothesis and not even a very good one.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Just Say No." - Nancy Reagan "No." - Ronald Reagan