Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Lowdown on Lidar

docs.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 284 posts

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#231

Post by lawnchair_larry »

ylhert wrote: post #102
gknoy wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Remember to ask the officer(after he has given you your ticket) what model laser/radar detector he was using, and at what distance he measured you at. That's an interesting point. Would that be admissible, though? Wouldn't you saying "He said it was at X feet" would be considered hearsay in court, versus a cop saying "I took a reading at X/2 feet"?

He/she should normally write it on the ticket(pretty sure they have to, it's always been there on tickets I've seen), but if you can get him/her to say it out loud, it's evidence that you can probably use against him/her. Also you should record your interactions with all officers. My final not a lawyer advice on beating speeding tickets: shut your mouth and don't answer the officers questions. If the officer asks how…

This isn't always the best strategy. If you're unlikely to make a court date, being remorseful and apologetic has a decent chance of getting you a reduction from the officer. If you play hardball, so will he, then you have no choice on going to court if you want a reduction.

If you're in serious trouble, STFU is the correct choice, but it's not necessarily the most economical for a moving violation.

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#232

Post by tempestn »

disillusioned wrote: post #230

I have lidar jammers on my car, but Arizona doesn't use a lot of lidar. (Motors and sometimes bored DPS will, but typically it's Ka band radar via Stalker Duals.) Not really knowing how lidar worked, except that a "laser" pulse hits the car and reads back a speed, this article was great because it explains that the measurement process is far slower than you'd think (0.3 seconds!) which is easily enough time for my ja…

I've read that in some jurisdictions police have started confiscating jammers and even charging users with obstruction of justice, on the theory that while owning them is explicitly legal, using them prevents police from carrying out their duties. Do you know what the history in AZ is like?

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#233

Post by icelancer »

bmelton wrote: post #43
Karunamon wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a common myth. The camera is not your accuser; the state is, using the camera as evidence of your violation. It would be no different than a security camera catching you breaking into a building. The camera doesn't sue, the owner of the building does.

Moreover, I'd think it would be quite trivial to place the camera in the court room if any judge were to seriously consider that defense, while the camera furiously exerts its right to silence.

Testimony from a witness that no longer presents information when questioned isn't a very good witness.

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#235

Post by sillysaurus3 »

adamtj wrote: post #205
kudu wrote: post #83

Why do HN mods keep changing the title from meaningful ones, which make the reader interested in the content, to generic, vague ones? You'll see that there's definitely a correlation between the moment that HN mods change the title and the post dropping off the top frontpage spot.

I would assume such changes come from a desire to be accurate. But accurate how? In what way? That depends on the purpose of the title. As I see it, our differences of opinion on this topic stem largely from misunderstanding it. I think it's not at all clear what we're even talking about, so we wind up arguing about slightly different things and fail to come to a consensus. I think that we need to really understand t…

On Reddit, people post short summaries as titles. It isn't a good idea. A boring title may not be descriptive, but it's prescriptive: it prevents tainting the conversation. People shouldn't go into an article with a mindset established by a summary written by a random user. That privilege should be reserved for the author.

Why not have mods vet the summaries, like they do with titles? Because it'd be way too much work to do that for all articles. Dozens make it to the frontpage each day. And then we'll run into situations where the mods haven't vetted a summary at night (because they're sleeping) so some linkbaity summary flairs up to the frontpage for no good reason. This is exactly what happens on Reddit, and it's the reason HN should maintain its current rule regarding titles.

Good content, not good titles, should define HN as a community.

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#236

Post by darksim905 »

gknoy wrote: post #149
darksim905 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where are you people getting your information that they aren't available for public scrutiny? Has no one ever heard of Guys of LIDAR? http://www.guysoflidar.com/ Granted, they can't dump the firmware these devices use but they are very telling in what these detectors can pick up, can't, real world examples, and so on.

What stops them from dumping the firmware? Technical or legal limitations?

I've wondered this too & I've reached out to them several times to no avail so either it's dead, they stopped doing it, or something happened. I'm trying to see if I can get a hold of a cop friend or two to see what the options are to legally acquire said LIDAR guns for tests. It would be a really cool project, even in the short hand.

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#237

Post by lotsofmangos »

dmoo wrote: post #17
justinsb wrote: post #9

Can anyone tell me why speeding tickets aren't enforced with video cameras (like red-light tickets are)? It would seem to be much more accurate, much easier to enforce, and much harder to dispute. Irrespective of the rights or wrongs of speed limit laws, I do believe that consistent and efficient enforcement can only be a good thing.

In Ireland we have a system where you can contest any of these automated fines in court. The problem is that the fines and penalty points double should you contest and lose. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penalty_points_in_Ireland

Alternately, you could change your name to Prawo Jazdy.

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#238

Post by na85 »

kudu wrote: post #83

Why do HN mods keep changing the title from meaningful ones, which make the reader interested in the content, to generic, vague ones? You'll see that there's definitely a correlation between the moment that HN mods change the title and the post dropping off the top frontpage spot.

This isn't reddit where sensationalizing your submission titles is encouraged. Submitters on HN should not be abusing the submission title to gain a privileged place in the discussion (i.e. editorials at the top of the page, unable to be affected by voting in the comments).

If you have an opinion on a submission, submit a comment to it.

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#239

Post by dang »

kudu wrote: post #83

Why do HN mods keep changing the title from meaningful ones, which make the reader interested in the content, to generic, vague ones? You'll see that there's definitely a correlation between the moment that HN mods change the title and the post dropping off the top frontpage spot.

That doesn't seem like a genuine question.

As for your factual claim, the post has been sitting near the top of the front page for 16 hours now.

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#240

Post by wastedhours »

ihaveajob wrote: post #12

Speed radars are good for speed traps, but not so great to prevent speed related incidents. They share the same fatal flaw with all other single-point speed meters: You can just slow down for a minute, while you pass by the speed trap, and then speed up for the rest of your trip. Instead, a 2-point speed meter (i.e. license plate readers every few miles, measuring time between matching reads) system is superior becau…

Yeah, but the initial ones in the UK were lane based (SPECS?), meaning if you changed lane at any point during that section, they wouldn't work. I assume this has been fixed now?
Post reply on HN