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

261–270 of 284 posts

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#261

Post by TeMPOraL »

colanderman wrote: post #255
TeMPOraL wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To get around this, my always speeding grandpere would just have us stop for gas, un cafe, etc right before each toll booth. That sort of defeats the point of speeding. Why endanger your lives and the lives of the others if you even don't get faster to your destination as you make additional stops to "defeat" anti-speeding systems?

You are supposing he stops for gas when his tank is full?

I'm supposing he stops for gas when his tank is still more than half-full to top it up, so that he stops exactly enough times to avoid being fined for speeding.

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#262

Post by adamtj »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #235
adamtj wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 wor…

But, HN titles are content. They are part of the conversation about the article. I agree that authors should be able to title and summarize their own work, but only in that work. They shouldn't be given any special control of the conversation about that work, which is what HN is.

I don't see the purpose of having mods vet all titles or summaries. I don't think titles need any special blessing by an elite caste of users. I don't think it's important that titles be in any way "official" or even neutral.

Perhaps I'm not concerned because I also don't see duplicate posts as being especially bad. Maybe they are a bit annoying sometimes, but there are worse problems in the world. Why not simply embrace duplicates and let the best title rise to the top? Certainly people occasionally post comments saying essentially the same thing. There, we just let the voting system do what it does and push the best version to the top. Why not do that with titles as well? The only problem I can see is that conversations may be fragmented -- but copy/paste is super easy. Links in comments are easy to create and to follow.

The only real need I see for moderators is to occasionally deal with a flagrantly abusive link. Even that is questionable.

I think people are smart. We're mostly adults here, and we aren't easily controlled with blatantly editorialized links. I don't see any danger that we need protection from.

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#263

Post by hyperbovine »

colanderman wrote: post #253
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…

As someone who daily drives a highway [1] that is marked 15 MPH below what it ought to be (as almost all highways are), I hope this system never comes to fruition. Now, automated tagging of morons who stare at their phone while driving? Bring it on. Those fuckers are a plague. [1] The Mass Pike (I-90); which is a toll highway that is marked 65 MPH, on which traffic averages 75 MPH, and 80 MPH is well under the speed…

> (given attentive drivers).

Good god man, since when is that a given? The situation worsens with each passing day.

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#264

Post by sillysaurus3 »

adamtj wrote: post #262
sillysaurus3 wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 wor…

But, HN titles are content. They are part of the conversation about the article. I agree that authors should be able to title and summarize their own work, but only in that work. They shouldn't be given any special control of the conversation about that work, which is what HN is. I don't see the purpose of having mods vet all titles or summaries. I don't think titles need any special blessing by an elite caste of use…

What's your response to this? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6572466

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#265

Post by Rapzid »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #210
rrreese wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New Zealand keeps fairly good records which can be downloaded here: http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Research/Documen... page 62 lists the percentage of crashes, crashes with injuries and crashes with fatalities. Speed is constantly found in around 30% of fatal crashes.

And when you consider that more than 30% of drivers are typically speeding on many/most roads...

If only we were so lucky. 30% of drivers in NZ drive 20km/h below the speed limit on the motorway is more like it :|

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#266

Post by colanderman »

hyperbovine wrote: post #263
colanderman wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who daily drives a highway [1] that is marked 15 MPH below what it ought to be (as almost all highways are), I hope this system never comes to fruition. Now, automated tagging of morons who stare at their phone while driving? Bring it on. Those fuckers are a plague. [1] The Mass Pike (I-90); which is a toll highway that is marked 65 MPH, on which traffic averages 75 MPH, and 80 MPH is well under the speed…

> (given attentive drivers). Good god man, since when is that a given? The situation worsens with each passing day.

Hence my assertion that police should crack down on such inattentive drivers.

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#267

Post by aidenn0 »

Fomite wrote: post #182
saosebastiao wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I feel this way in the vast majority of Maryland.

Northern Virginia is that way too. Even with marked crosswalks with yield to pedestrian signs, crossing at an intersection without a traffic light is downright scary.

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#268

Post by nknighthb »

Alupis wrote: post #147
mortov wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The video is required to zoom to show the driver of the vehicle as well for identification purposes. It prevents people claiming they were not the driver. (e.g. it looks like this http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/pictured-speeding-motor... )

That image may reasonably prove it was not a woman driving the vehicle, but no way can that prove it was the actual driver (or anyone's identity). It's way too blurry and pixelated. Also, a LIDAR beam shouldn't be pointed at a sloped window, so I doubt it actually proves where the beam was pointed at either.

I don't see how it could even prove it was not a woman driving. I'm barely comfortable asserting that it shows a human face.

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#269

Post by aidenn0 »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #231
ylhert wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

In Virginia, all moving violations are arrestable offenses, so I grew up doing STFU. My understanding is that most states are not that way though.

Re: The Lowdown on Lidar

#270

Post by reustle »

grecy wrote: post #36
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…

> I can't believe [average speed detector is] not implanted at least in all interstate freeways. They are very common in Australia. It takes a photo of your license plate, then another 10km (or whatever) down the freeway. If the two photos are less than x seconds apart, you get a speeding ticket.

They also have these in Norway. The 2nd camera has a light on it and will blink yellow if you should expect a ticket in the mail.
Post reply on HN