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

151–160 of 284 posts

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#151

Post by alphonse23 »

taeric wrote: post #4

I confess I was expecting to not care for this. I'm not sure how any of it should be surprising, as it seemed fairly straight forward analysis of the tools. That said, this was a ridiculously fun read. More detailed than expected for some parts, and always informative. I'm glad it did not come across as anti speed detectors. Really more of a "know the limitations."

I hope he realizes this, as much as I hope everybody else realizes this, that the only reason why he got the violation reduced was because he brought his attorney on board. Anybody who lives in California whose contested a ticket knows that 9/10 times (if not even more than that) judges side with the officers -- whether they have a strong case or not -- the State of California certainly doesn't want it's residents to get any ideas.. if you know what I mean.

I wonder if his attorney cost more than the actual citation? Most people can't afford lawyer fees, so cops in California get away with this small stuff all the time without any fuss, whether they were liable or not. Congrats Joshua Block -- BTW I loved "Effective Java"!

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#152

Post by koenigdavidmj »

saosebastiao wrote: post #45
growse wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Possibly because the cost/benefit just isn't there. In the UK, the data shows that speeding (excessive speed for the conditions above the speed limit) is the primary cause in single digit percentage of accidents. I believe there's data from 1996 and 2007 for this, will dig it out when I'm not on mobile. If you want to spend money on accident prevention, there's much better things to target than speeding.

I have yet to get into an accident, but I actively avoid walking across several streets in Seattle because of a combination of entitlement thinking (This road is mine because I'm in a car!), and pervasive speeding. I'm not the only one...I recently found out almost nobody on my side of a local road will cross the road due the same problem. The road, therefore, has become a barrier to commerce and has split a communit…

What road are you talking about in particular?

If it's something like 15 Av NW in Ballard, it's pretty obvious that you're meant to cross at a light, even if you legally have more of a right to cross at the uncontrolled intersection one block away. It's unreasonable to expect a highway-in-all-but-name to stop for one person when marked, lit crossings exist within five blocks at all points along the road.

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#153

Post by DanBC »

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.

"Why do we revert to orginal titles" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6572466

The question has been asked, and answered, very many times.

The guidelines have advice about threads like these: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#154

Post by DanBC »

Alupis wrote: post #142
curtis wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd really like to see more transparency when it comes to title changes. The most recent case where one of my submissions had a title change mirrors what kudu is describing here: a meaningful (and I think accurate) title changed to a generic and vague one -- followed by a rapid decline in the rate of upvotes. I think there are legitimate reasons for title changes, and I think that the Hacker News mods generally do go…

> I'd really like to see more transparency I agree. From the random weighting down of certain articles, to title changes, to just flat-out removing/flaging some posts... it seems HN is becoming a "whatever the Mod who happens to be on today feels like" site -- which really detracts from the awesomeness of HN -- I'm not looking for a gatekeeper news site - if I wanted that, I'd go to CNN or something.

You're saying mods are responsible for some things that are user actions.

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#155

Post by [deleted] »

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.

[deleted]

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#156

Post by KC8ZKF »

GHFigs wrote: post #144
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.

Alternate questions: Why do authors keep using generic and vague titles? Why do submitters keep submitting content with generic and vague titles?

Anything else is declared misleading linkbait.

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#157

Post by rmrfrmrf »

Alupis wrote: post #103
diminoten wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What was the previous title? The current one is the same as the name of the provided link. If you don't like the title, blame the author. Mods, afaik, are just trying to follow the rule that the submission should reflect the title of the article.

The title I first saw was: Josh Bloch Fights a LIDAR Speeding Ticket (with Science) Which is much better than the currently edited version.

> Which is much better than the currently edited version.

Not in my opinion. The speeding ticket Mr. Bloch fights is a secondary point to the main purpose of the presentation.

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#158

Post by Alupis »

Alupis wrote: post #142
curtis wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd really like to see more transparency when it comes to title changes. The most recent case where one of my submissions had a title change mirrors what kudu is describing here: a meaningful (and I think accurate) title changed to a generic and vague one -- followed by a rapid decline in the rate of upvotes. I think there are legitimate reasons for title changes, and I think that the Hacker News mods generally do go…

> I'd really like to see more transparency I agree. From the random weighting down of certain articles, to title changes, to just flat-out removing/flaging some posts... it seems HN is becoming a "whatever the Mod who happens to be on today feels like" site -- which really detracts from the awesomeness of HN -- I'm not looking for a gatekeeper news site - if I wanted that, I'd go to CNN or something.

Discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8116199

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#159

Post by DanBC »

timdierks wrote: post #116
Alupis wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The title I first saw was: Josh Bloch Fights a LIDAR Speeding Ticket (with Science) Which is much better than the currently edited version.

I submitted the link with the title you note for the following three reasons: 1. Josh Bloch is an author of particular interest to this community. 2. When I searched to see if the page had already been submitted, I noted that recent HN posts on LIDAR were on technical laser ranging (e.g. in mapping applications), not on speed enforcement. 3. I thought it was an article that would be of interest to HN readers, so I th…

"The Lowdown on LIDAR (Josh Blochs presentation)" is 47 chars and would probably have been kept.

Your title is link-baity. "Beats speeding ticket" and "with science" are obvious link bait. I'm kind of surprised that you thought your replacements would stick.

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#160

Post by spott »

MichaelDickens wrote: post #52
selectodude wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about saving lives. It's about revenue generation.

Speed limit laws don't exist to generate revenue. They exist to disincentivize speeding. If speed limit laws didn't exist, can you imagine lawmakers saying, "We need more money. Hey, I know! Let's charge people money for driving over a certain speed!"

Speed limit laws started as a safety thing, then they were a car efficiency thing (during the 70's oil crisis). The problem is that the municipalities started to increasingly depend on the income from traffic enforcement.

No, lawmakers don't say "Hey, I know! Let's charge people money for driving over a certain speed!", they instead say: "lets install these red light cameras on this intersection that doesn't see a lot of accidents.", or "this long straight stretch of highway, with few accidents, but lots of speeding should be better policed". The enforcement of laws becomes more about making money from the tickets than from concerns about safety.

Post reply on HN