Megalextoria
Retro computing and gaming, sci-fi books, tv and movies and other geeky stuff.

Home » Digital Archaeology » Computer Arcana » Computer Folklore » Adobe oddity?
Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend 
Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
Re: autonomous car tricks, was charging [message #404171 is a reply to message #404160] Wed, 13 January 2021 17:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
John Levine is currently offline  John Levine
Messages: 1240
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <5fff55c2.4851125@news.dslextreme.com>,
Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
> I can only wonder what a self-driving car would do. I would think that if a
> couple of sawhorses is all it takes to immobilize an autonomous vehicle, at the
> very least we're going to see more of this sort of petty vandalism. ...

Same answer as always: why do you believe this has to be worse or
different from what human drivers would do. If you were driving along
and there were some sawhorses across the road, what would you do?

I suppose if a self-driving car came to them and stopped, the
passenger would likely get out and move them. If the passenger for
some reason can't do that, well, we already have cars with assistive
technologies for drivers who can't walk, so they'd be equallly stuck.

Or maybe a human driver would slowly drive around on the shoulder. Hey,
maybe a self-driving car could do that, too.

--
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404178 is a reply to message #404169] Wed, 13 January 2021 23:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: J. Clarke

On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 16:48:31 -0500, Radey Shouman
<shouman@comcast.net> wrote:

> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 12 Jan 2021 19:52:11 GMT, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2021-01-11, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:17:33 -0000 (UTC), John Levine
>>>> > <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> In article <uo8nvftsoa1vdit7uqrpmof0824r1rie2l@4ax.com>,
>>>> >> Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> We'll get to the self-driving car the same way we got to the
>>>> >>> self-shifting car.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Maybe I'm forgetting, but I don't recall a generation of cars that had
>>>> >> transmissions that shifted on their own 80% of the time but sometimes
>>>> >> disengaged so you had to step on the clutch and shift manually.
>>>>
>>>> That's because Microsoft doesn't make cars.
>>>
>>> Uh, I own a Ford which owes a good bit of its functionality to
>>> something commonly referred to by owners of Fords of that vintage as
>>> "Microsoft Stync".
>>>
>>
>> This, of course, brings up another point: What genius decided it was a good
>> idea to put so many controls into a touch-screen, that requires the driver
>> to take his eyes off the road to operate them, as opposed to physical
>> buttons and dials that can be operated by touch while still watching the
>> road?
>
> That's just "value engineering" -- buttons are expensive in material and
> dashboard real estate.
>
> I do really hate the touch screen interface for driving.

That's the good thing about Microsoft Stync. It's so lousy that there
is no temptation whatsoever to use it.
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404202 is a reply to message #404157] Thu, 14 January 2021 13:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: JimP

On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 13:15:37 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:42:34 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
>> <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 21:57:03 GMT
>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
>>>
>>>> People should be talking about the issues I've been raising. The
>>>> advocates have contrary interests that preclude them from being
>>>> forthright about the problems. There should be more discussion about
>>>> possible negative consequences before they occur.
>>>
>>> When did the human race ever do anything that way ? While one bunch
>>> are busy discussing the consequences and making plans the rest of the world
>>> is getting on with it and dealing with the problems as they come up
>>> discovering as they do that half the anticipated problems never come up but
>>> unfortunately half the expected benefits never materialise and a whole load
>>> of things good, bad and indifferent happen that nobody saw coming.
>>>
>>> Self driving cars will be no different.
>>
>> Have any of you seen early, 1930s and 1940s, films on what people
>> living back then thought the 1960s or later would be like ?
>>
>> Some are on youtube. And they pretty much get it wrong. In the 1939
>> World's Fair, there was a large diorama, with small moving cars, that
>> showed what the near future would look like. They got the many lane
>> highways, but not the rest.
>>
>
> At that point such highways already existed - the Autobahnen in Germany and
> a few parkways in the US.

But it was claimed it would be nation wide.

The elevated roadways between buildings, didn't happen.

--
Jim
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404203 is a reply to message #404159] Thu, 14 January 2021 13:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: JimP

On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 13:15:38 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:42:34 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 21:57:03 GMT
>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
>>>
>>>> People should be talking about the issues I've been raising. The
>>>> advocates have contrary interests that preclude them from being
>>>> forthright about the problems. There should be more discussion about
>>>> possible negative consequences before they occur.
>>>
>>> When did the human race ever do anything that way ? While one bunch
>>> are busy discussing the consequences and making plans the rest of the world
>>> is getting on with it and dealing with the problems as they come up
>>> discovering as they do that half the anticipated problems never come up but
>>> unfortunately half the expected benefits never materialise and a whole load
>>> of things good, bad and indifferent happen that nobody saw coming.
>>>
>>> Self driving cars will be no different.
>>
>> Ah. So despite recognizing the errors of the past and seizing the opportunity
>> to do a better job with autonomous vehicles, we should instead make same old
>> mistakes because we've always done it that way?
>>
>>
>
> When we moved from horse and buggy to cars a lot of the design stayed the
> same, because it worked and people didn’t have to learn a whole new thing.
> Cars have evolved, but still have elements that date way back.

US tanks in WW2 were designed so that farm boys who had driven
tractors, could drive the tanks.

--
Jim
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404219 is a reply to message #404203] Thu, 14 January 2021 16:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: Thomas Koenig

JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> schrieb:

> US tanks in WW2 were designed so that farm boys who had driven
> tractors, could drive the tanks.

Did the tractors at the time use steering brakes?

In my Bundeswehr times, I drove a M113, which had the same sort
of system, it was certainly a change from driving a car, which I
had done before.
Re: autonomous car tricks, was charging [message #404220 is a reply to message #404171] Thu, 14 January 2021 16:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
usenet is currently offline  usenet
Messages: 514
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 22:11:37 -0000 (UTC), John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> In article <5fff55c2.4851125@news.dslextreme.com>,
> Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>> I can only wonder what a self-driving car would do. I would think that if a
>> couple of sawhorses is all it takes to immobilize an autonomous vehicle, at the
>> very least we're going to see more of this sort of petty vandalism. ...
>
> Same answer as always: why do you believe this has to be worse or
> different from what human drivers would do. If you were driving along
> and there were some sawhorses across the road, what would you do?

So you program the self-driving car to recognize sawhorses. What about two big,
empty cardboard boxes covered with a sheet? How about a large piece of plywood
propped up against a barrel? Humans have not only the ability to recognize all
manner of possible barricades and assess their relative permanence, but also to
divine their erectors' motivation. How will autonomous vehicles know if that
intent is mischievous, malcious, or murderous?


> I suppose if a self-driving car came to them and stopped, the
> passenger would likely get out and move them. If the passenger for
> some reason can't do that, well, we already have cars with assistive
> technologies for drivers who can't walk, so they'd be equallly stuck.

As soon as you require a competent adult passenger to deal with possible
out-of-band situations, you immediately negate the utility of self-driving cars
for the disabled, etc., and undercut the arguments advocates make for the same.
Even drivers who can't walk can see the situation and know if they can or should
drive around the barrier or turn around.


> Or maybe a human driver would slowly drive around on the shoulder. Hey,
> maybe a self-driving car could do that, too.

The roads where I grew up had little to no shoulder. And shoulders could be
blocked too.

It seems obvious to me that miscreants and criminals *will* screw around with
autonomous vehicles this way once they can.

I know these "edge cases," as I call them, make up only a very small percentage
of driving situations, but multiplied across all the drivers they may add up to
thousands or even millions of instances. Many people will never be bothered by
them, and for others it will effectively cancel the practicality of self-driving
cars.
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404221 is a reply to message #404156] Thu, 14 January 2021 16:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
usenet is currently offline  usenet
Messages: 514
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 13:15:35 -0700, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>> On Sat, 9 Jan 2021 21:02:40 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
>> wrote:
>>> No dispute there, that's a shortcoming of Tesla's Autopilot - it's
>>> a real shame that people are stupid enough to need a nanny like that but
>>> it seems they are.
>>
>> You've been making two big assumptions throughout this discussion. The first,
>> which you acknowledge, is that self-driving cars are inevitable, and will
>> eventually be safer than human drivers.
>>
>> The second is that if self-driving cars do become a reality as you expect,
>> people won't find a way to do something stupid with them anyway. (grin)
>
> I think all of these are inevitable. The one thing not mentioned is that we
> will probably gradually rework our infrastructure to better support
> self-driving cars, exactly as the rise of the automobile led to the
> construction of paved highways. I'm thinking of things like traffic signs
> and signals that broadcast instructions to the cars so they wouldn't have
> to rely on vision.

I've mentioned infrastructure changes more than once.

At least one problem with using radio signals is malicous spoofing. More likely
is a change in signage and/or road markings.
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404222 is a reply to message #404166] Thu, 14 January 2021 16:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
usenet is currently offline  usenet
Messages: 514
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 16:24:02 -0500, J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 13:15:35 -0700, Peter Flass
> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 9 Jan 2021 21:02:40 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>> No dispute there, that's a shortcoming of Tesla's Autopilot - it's
>>>> a real shame that people are stupid enough to need a nanny like that but
>>>> it seems they are.
>>>
>>> You've been making two big assumptions throughout this discussion. The first,
>>> which you acknowledge, is that self-driving cars are inevitable, and will
>>> eventually be safer than human drivers.
>>>
>>> The second is that if self-driving cars do become a reality as you expect,
>>> people won't find a way to do something stupid with them anyway. (grin)
>>
>> I think all of these are inevitable. The one thing not mentioned is that we
>> will probably gradually rework our infrastructure to better support
>> self-driving cars, exactly as the rise of the automobile led to the
>> construction of paved highways. I’m thinking of things like traffic signs
>> and signals that broadcast instructions to the cars so they wouldn’t have
>> to rely on vision.
>
> That might start happening but if they're commonplace enough for it to
> be an issue I suspect that they'll already be good at dealing with
> traffic lights and signage.
>
> Note that Teslas today can recognize (some? Not sure how good the
> recognition is at dealing with different designs) traffic lights--the
> issue they have is that they can't tell whether the light for their
> lane is green, so they take the safe default and stop for all of them
> regardless of color.

Recent traffic camera footage in San Francisco showed one company's
self-driving car (I think it was Uber) running red lights several times.
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404223 is a reply to message #404167] Thu, 14 January 2021 16:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
usenet is currently offline  usenet
Messages: 514
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 16:41:54 -0500, J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 13:15:35 -0700, Peter Flass
> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 20:00:35 -0500, Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 11:28:50 GMT, usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
>>>> >> Have you considered for a second that the current driver assist is
>>>> >> an essential step in developing full self driving ?
>>>> >
>>>> > No, because they are only a tiny part of what is required for driving.
>>>>
>>>> Hitching a quadruped to a handcart was only a tiny part of what is
>>>> required for a self-driving car, but it was an essential step.
>>>
>>> If you're going to go back that far, why stop there? The smelting of iron or
>>> the development of written communication were essential steps too.
>>>
>>> You have to put your stake somewhere. I think people underestimate how
>>> complicated driving is.
>>
>> Nerd that I am, every once in a while, while driving, I wonder what someone
>> from a prior century would have made of it. Not that they probably couldn’t
>> soon become proficient, but their early reactions would be something to
>> see.
>
> In the early 1800s the notion of high speed (50 mph) trains was
> considered to be ludicrous because a human could not survive at that
> speed.

"What can be more palpably absurd than the prospect held out of locomotives
travelling twice as fast as stagecoaches?"
-- The Quarterly Review (England), March 1825
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404224 is a reply to message #404158] Thu, 14 January 2021 16:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
usenet is currently offline  usenet
Messages: 514
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 13:15:38 -0700, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 12 Jan 2021 19:52:11 GMT, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>> On 2021-01-11, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:17:33 -0000 (UTC), John Levine
>>>> <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>>>> > In article <uo8nvftsoa1vdit7uqrpmof0824r1rie2l@4ax.com>,
>>>> > Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> We'll get to the self-driving car the same way we got to the
>>>> >> self-shifting car.
>>>> >
>>>> > Maybe I'm forgetting, but I don't recall a generation of cars that had
>>>> > transmissions that shifted on their own 80% of the time but sometimes
>>>> > disengaged so you had to step on the clutch and shift manually.
>>>
>>> That's because Microsoft doesn't make cars.
>>
>> Uh, I own a Ford which owes a good bit of its functionality to
>> something commonly referred to by owners of Fords of that vintage as
>> "Microsoft Stync".
>>
>
> This, of course, brings up another point: What genius decided it was a good
> idea to put so many controls into a touch-screen, that requires the driver
> to take his eyes off the road to operate them, as opposed to physical
> buttons and dials that can be operated by touch while still watching the
> road?

That highlights one of many ways cars could be made safer now, without investing
billions of dollars in an unproven, expensive technology.
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404228 is a reply to message #404168] Thu, 14 January 2021 17:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Charlie Gibbs is currently offline  Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 4889
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 2021-01-13, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 13:15:38 -0700, Peter Flass
> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> This, of course, brings up another point: What genius decided it was a good
>> idea to put so many controls into a touch-screen, that requires the driver
>> to take his eyes off the road to operate them, as opposed to physical
>> buttons and dials that can be operated by touch while still watching the
>> road?
>
> Amen. That's one of my objections to Teslas. One of the car
> manufacturers (I want to say SAAB but can't find any evidence to that
> effect) was careful to make every control different from the others so
> that it was difficult to mistake one for another.

Donald A. Norman, in _The Design of Everyday Things_, illustrated this
point with workers in a nuclear plant who put various beer keg handles
on control levers so they could easily distinguish them by feel.

The aviation industry learned decades ago that it's a good idea
for various controls to feel different. It's embarrassing to go
to retract your flaps after landing and pull the gear lever instead.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | "Some of you may die,
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | but it's a sacrifice
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | I'm willing to make."
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Lord Farquaad (Shrek)
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404229 is a reply to message #404178] Thu, 14 January 2021 17:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Charlie Gibbs is currently offline  Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 4889
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 2021-01-14, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 16:48:31 -0500, Radey Shouman
> <shouman@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> I do really hate the touch screen interface for driving.
>
> That's the good thing about Microsoft Stync. It's so lousy that there
> is no temptation whatsoever to use it.

Microsoft is not a necessary evil. Microsoft is not necessary.
-- Ted Nelson, paraphrased (he was talking about IBM)

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | "Some of you may die,
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | but it's a sacrifice
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | I'm willing to make."
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Lord Farquaad (Shrek)
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404230 is a reply to message #404167] Thu, 14 January 2021 17:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Charlie Gibbs is currently offline  Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 4889
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 2021-01-13, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 13:15:35 -0700, Peter Flass
> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Nerd that I am, every once in a while, while driving, I wonder what someone
>> from a prior century would have made of it. Not that they probably couldn’t
>> soon become proficient, but their early reactions would be something to
>> see.
>
> In the early 1800s the notion of high speed (50 mph) trains was
> considered to be ludicrous because a human could not survive at that
> speed.

Such attitudes survive to this day. The IOC declared that there would be
no women's ski-jumping event in the 2010 Winter Olympics because it would
make their uterus explode.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | "Some of you may die,
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | but it's a sacrifice
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | I'm willing to make."
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Lord Farquaad (Shrek)
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404253 is a reply to message #404170] Fri, 15 January 2021 11:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Alfred Falk is currently offline  Alfred Falk
Messages: 191
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Radey Shouman <shouman@comcast.net> wrote in
news:87y2gwv768.fsf@mothra.home:

> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:42:34 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
>>> <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 21:57:03 GMT
>>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > People should be talking about the issues I've been raising. The
>>>> > advocates have contrary interests that preclude them from being
>>>> > forthright about the problems. There should be more discussion
>>>> > about possible negative consequences before they occur.
>>>>
>>>> When did the human race ever do anything that way ? While one bunch
>>>> are busy discussing the consequences and making plans the rest of
>>>> the world is getting on with it and dealing with the problems as
>>>> they come up discovering as they do that half the anticipated
>>>> problems never come up but unfortunately half the expected benefits
>>>> never materialise and a whole load of things good, bad and
>>>> indifferent happen that nobody saw coming.
>>>>
>>>> Self driving cars will be no different.
>>>
>>> Ah. So despite recognizing the errors of the past and seizing the
>>> opportunity to do a better job with autonomous vehicles, we should
>>> instead make same old mistakes because we've always done it that way?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> When we moved from horse and buggy to cars a lot of the design stayed
>> the same, because it worked and people didn’t have to learn a whole
>> new thing. Cars have evolved, but still have elements that date way
>> back.
>
> Kurt Vonnegut claimed to have seen, in his youth, old farmers hauling
> back on the steering wheel and yelling "whoa".

Probably true. My father used to tell of an older uncle learning to drive
doing just that. Vehicle was stopped by the wall of the barn.
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404258 is a reply to message #404219] Fri, 15 January 2021 14:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: JimP

On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 21:51:17 -0000 (UTC), Thomas Koenig
<tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
> JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> schrieb:
>
>> US tanks in WW2 were designed so that farm boys who had driven
>> tractors, could drive the tanks.
>
> Did the tractors at the time use steering brakes?
>
> In my Bundeswehr times, I drove a M113, which had the same sort
> of system, it was certainly a change from driving a car, which I
> had done before.

I read that the left track could be locked and while the right one
moved, to make a turn.

--
Jim
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404259 is a reply to message #404223] Fri, 15 January 2021 14:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: JimP

On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 21:56:45 GMT, usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 16:41:54 -0500, J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 13:15:35 -0700, Peter Flass
>> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 20:00:35 -0500, Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 11:28:50 GMT, usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
>>>> >>> Have you considered for a second that the current driver assist is
>>>> >>> an essential step in developing full self driving ?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> No, because they are only a tiny part of what is required for driving.
>>>> >
>>>> > Hitching a quadruped to a handcart was only a tiny part of what is
>>>> > required for a self-driving car, but it was an essential step.
>>>>
>>>> If you're going to go back that far, why stop there? The smelting of iron or
>>>> the development of written communication were essential steps too.
>>>>
>>>> You have to put your stake somewhere. I think people underestimate how
>>>> complicated driving is.
>>>
>>> Nerd that I am, every once in a while, while driving, I wonder what someone
>>> from a prior century would have made of it. Not that they probably couldn’t
>>> soon become proficient, but their early reactions would be something to
>>> see.
>>
>> In the early 1800s the notion of high speed (50 mph) trains was
>> considered to be ludicrous because a human could not survive at that
>> speed.
>
> "What can be more palpably absurd than the prospect held out of locomotives
> travelling twice as fast as stagecoaches?"
> -- The Quarterly Review (England), March 1825

My mother received an encyclopedia set for Christmas before WW2. It
stated, with scientific accuracy, that humanity would never get to the
Earth's moon because taking the speed of a locomotive, it would take
too long to get there. Not making it worth while for a trip. She said
60 miles per hour was on the chart. I said that's strange, because
diesel locomotives at the time could go faster than that. She then
told me it was steam locomotives they used in the chart/drawing.

--
Jim
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404260 is a reply to message #404258] Fri, 15 January 2021 14:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
scott is currently offline  scott
Messages: 3814
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 21:51:17 -0000 (UTC), Thomas Koenig
> <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
>> JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>
>>> US tanks in WW2 were designed so that farm boys who had driven
>>> tractors, could drive the tanks.
>>
>> Did the tractors at the time use steering brakes?
>>
>> In my Bundeswehr times, I drove a M113, which had the same sort
>> of system, it was certainly a change from driving a car, which I
>> had done before.
>
> I read that the left track could be locked and while the right one
> moved, to make a turn.

In WW2 timeframe, the typical tractor[*] had individual brake
pedals for each rear wheel. A bar could be flipped from
one brake into a slot on the other to join them. A sharp
turn involved using the brake on the side one turns into.

[*] E.g. The IH Farmall letter series.

My third millenium Kubota has similar brakes.
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404262 is a reply to message #404259] Fri, 15 January 2021 16:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: Vir Campestris

On 15/01/2021 19:19, JimP wrote:
> My mother received an encyclopedia set for Christmas before WW2. It
> stated, with scientific accuracy, that humanity would never get to the
> Earth's moon because taking the speed of a locomotive, it would take
> too long to get there. Not making it worth while for a trip. She said
> 60 miles per hour was on the chart. I said that's strange, because
> diesel locomotives at the time could go faster than that. She then
> told me it was steam locomotives they used in the chart/drawing.

In 1938 Mallard set the steam speed record at 126MPH...

Andy
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404264 is a reply to message #404260] Fri, 15 January 2021 16:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Charlie Gibbs is currently offline  Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 4889
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 2021-01-15, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:

> JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 21:51:17 -0000 (UTC), Thomas Koenig
>> <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
>>
>>> JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>>
>>>> US tanks in WW2 were designed so that farm boys who had driven
>>>> tractors, could drive the tanks.
>>>
>>> Did the tractors at the time use steering brakes?
>>>
>>> In my Bundeswehr times, I drove a M113, which had the same sort
>>> of system, it was certainly a change from driving a car, which I
>>> had done before.
>>
>> I read that the left track could be locked and while the right one
>> moved, to make a turn.
>
> In WW2 timeframe, the typical tractor[*] had individual brake
> pedals for each rear wheel. A bar could be flipped from
> one brake into a slot on the other to join them. A sharp
> turn involved using the brake on the side one turns into.
>
> [*] E.g. The IH Farmall letter series.
>
> My third millenium Kubota has similar brakes.

Many light aircraft have individual brakes for the main wheels.
You can turn pretty tightly even with tricycle gear if you're
good on the pedals.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | "Some of you may die,
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | but it's a sacrifice
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | I'm willing to make."
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Lord Farquaad (Shrek)
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404265 is a reply to message #404259] Fri, 15 January 2021 16:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ahem A Rivet's Shot is currently offline  Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4288
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 13:19:16 -0600
JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> wrote:

> My mother received an encyclopedia set for Christmas before WW2. It
> stated, with scientific accuracy, that humanity would never get to the
> Earth's moon because taking the speed of a locomotive, it would take
> too long to get there. Not making it worth while for a trip. She said
> 60 miles per hour was on the chart.

But that's only a bit less than six months, it's laying the rails
and stocking the waystations that's the real problem.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404267 is a reply to message #404264] Fri, 15 January 2021 18:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: J. Clarke

On 15 Jan 2021 21:49:18 GMT, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
wrote:

> On 2021-01-15, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
>
>> JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 21:51:17 -0000 (UTC), Thomas Koenig
>>> <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>>>
>>>> > US tanks in WW2 were designed so that farm boys who had driven
>>>> > tractors, could drive the tanks.
>>>>
>>>> Did the tractors at the time use steering brakes?
>>>>
>>>> In my Bundeswehr times, I drove a M113, which had the same sort
>>>> of system, it was certainly a change from driving a car, which I
>>>> had done before.
>>>
>>> I read that the left track could be locked and while the right one
>>> moved, to make a turn.
>>
>> In WW2 timeframe, the typical tractor[*] had individual brake
>> pedals for each rear wheel. A bar could be flipped from
>> one brake into a slot on the other to join them. A sharp
>> turn involved using the brake on the side one turns into.
>>
>> [*] E.g. The IH Farmall letter series.
>>
>> My third millenium Kubota has similar brakes.
>
> Many light aircraft have individual brakes for the main wheels.
> You can turn pretty tightly even with tricycle gear if you're
> good on the pedals.

Taidraggers don't have any other way to steer on the ground for the
most part. Note that "taildragger" isn't necessarily "light", that
category includes the B-17 and the Lancaster.

Caterpillar tractors you steer with two levers that provide
differential braking.

And if you go down to Home Despot and check out the riding mowers
you'll find "zero turn" models that use a similar principle.

And then there are dune buggies, where a standard mod is to run the
parking-brake cables to two separate levers so each rear wheel can be
braked independently.

And on these modrin cars the computer even handles that sort of thing
for you.
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404268 is a reply to message #404264] Fri, 15 January 2021 18:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ahem A Rivet's Shot is currently offline  Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4288
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 15 Jan 2021 21:49:18 GMT
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

> Many light aircraft have individual brakes for the main wheels.
> You can turn pretty tightly even with tricycle gear if you're
> good on the pedals.

One pilot on the Munich/Heathrow run seemed to take great joy in
exploring the manoeuvrability of the Airbus 320s he was given to fly. I
don't know how fast he took the slip off the runway or the corners while
taxiing but it was a *lot* faster than anyone else I've ever flown with.
Those things corner alarmingly well for such a large machine. His takeoff
technique made me suspect he didn't like being on runways, turn to the
line, step on the brakes (hard), spool engines until the brakes slip and
let go. He tended to be off the ground in about 2/3 the runway the rest
used. I never did catch his name but I enjoyed flying with him.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404270 is a reply to message #404262] Fri, 15 January 2021 19:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: JimP

On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 21:21:16 +0000, Vir Campestris
<vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 15/01/2021 19:19, JimP wrote:
>> My mother received an encyclopedia set for Christmas before WW2. It
>> stated, with scientific accuracy, that humanity would never get to the
>> Earth's moon because taking the speed of a locomotive, it would take
>> too long to get there. Not making it worth while for a trip. She said
>> 60 miles per hour was on the chart. I said that's strange, because
>> diesel locomotives at the time could go faster than that. She then
>> told me it was steam locomotives they used in the chart/drawing.
>
> In 1938 Mallard set the steam speed record at 126MPH...
>
> Andy

Yeah, that's why the encyclopedia made no sense.

--
Jim
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404278 is a reply to message #404258] Sat, 16 January 2021 04:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: Thomas Koenig

JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> schrieb:
> On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 21:51:17 -0000 (UTC), Thomas Koenig
> <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
>> JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> schrieb:
>>
>>> US tanks in WW2 were designed so that farm boys who had driven
>>> tractors, could drive the tanks.
>>
>> Did the tractors at the time use steering brakes?
>>
>> In my Bundeswehr times, I drove a M113, which had the same sort
>> of system, it was certainly a change from driving a car, which I
>> had done before.

> I read that the left track could be locked and while the right one
> moved, to make a turn.

Usually, you don't lock one of the tracks, you only want it to run
slower to make a gradual turn.

Making a turn that is too sharp is a good way to throw off your
tracks in the field.

One bad thing about this arrangement is that it is actually the
only brake you have. So, if you want to come to a slow down, you
pull both levers towards you. If one of the brakes bites a little
bit harder, you turn towards that side, and you have to compensate.

Having a steering wheel which acts on a planetary gear (like the
Marder, which I learned on, has) is a much better arrangement.

If you turn your steering wheel to the left, this will make the
left track move forward and the right one backward.

This arrangement also allows you to turn on a spot (on concrete)
because you can make one track go forward and the other one backward
in neutral.

The only non-counterintuitive thing abou that is that you have
to turn the steering wheel in the opposite direction when driving
backwards.
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404279 is a reply to message #404278] Sat, 16 January 2021 04:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: Thomas Koenig

I wrote:

> If you turn your steering wheel to the left, this will make the
> left track move forward and the right one backward.

The other way around, of course.
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404299 is a reply to message #404270] Sat, 16 January 2021 22:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 7791
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 21:21:16 +0000, Vir Campestris
> <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 15/01/2021 19:19, JimP wrote:
>>> My mother received an encyclopedia set for Christmas before WW2. It
>>> stated, with scientific accuracy, that humanity would never get to the
>>> Earth's moon because taking the speed of a locomotive, it would take
>>> too long to get there. Not making it worth while for a trip. She said
>>> 60 miles per hour was on the chart. I said that's strange, because
>>> diesel locomotives at the time could go faster than that. She then
>>> told me it was steam locomotives they used in the chart/drawing.
>>
>> In 1938 Mallard set the steam speed record at 126MPH...
>>
>> Andy
>
> Yeah, that's why the encyclopedia made no sense.
>

Encyclopedias tend to be updated relatively infrequently. I got a set of
children’s’ books in the 50s that had stuff dating back to around 1900. I
expect that encyclopedias would be similar. If she got the set in the late
30s it probably wouldn’t have got much updating since the Depression.

--
Pete
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404306 is a reply to message #404299] Sun, 17 January 2021 06:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: gareth evans

On 17/01/2021 03:00, Peter Flass wrote:
> JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 21:21:16 +0000, Vir Campestris
>> <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 15/01/2021 19:19, JimP wrote:
>>>> My mother received an encyclopedia set for Christmas before WW2. It
>>>> stated, with scientific accuracy, that humanity would never get to the
>>>> Earth's moon because taking the speed of a locomotive, it would take
>>>> too long to get there. Not making it worth while for a trip. She said
>>>> 60 miles per hour was on the chart. I said that's strange, because
>>>> diesel locomotives at the time could go faster than that. She then
>>>> told me it was steam locomotives they used in the chart/drawing.
>>>
>>> In 1938 Mallard set the steam speed record at 126MPH...
>>>
>>> Andy
>>
>> Yeah, that's why the encyclopedia made no sense.
>>
>
> Encyclopedias tend to be updated relatively infrequently. I got a set of
> children’s’ books in the 50s that had stuff dating back to around 1900. I
> expect that encyclopedias would be similar. If she got the set in the late
> 30s it probably wouldn’t have got much updating since the Depression.
>

Diphthongs of the World unite!

Encyclopaedia.
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404312 is a reply to message #404306] Sun, 17 January 2021 12:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Charlie Gibbs is currently offline  Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 4889
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 2021-01-17, gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On 17/01/2021 03:00, Peter Flass wrote:
>
>> Encyclopedias tend to be updated relatively infrequently. I got a set of
>> children’s’ books in the 50s that had stuff dating back to around 1900. I
>> expect that encyclopedias would be similar. If she got the set in the late
>> 30s it probably wouldn’t have got much updating since the Depression.
>
> Diphthongs of the World unite!
>
> Encyclopaedia.

OK everybody, put on your best Jiminy Cricket impersonation and sing along:

Curiosity, people say
Killed the kitty-cat one fine day
Well that may be true, but hear me
Here is what to do for curiosity

It's the en...cyclopedia
E-N-C-Y-C-L-O-P-E-D-I-A
En...cyclopedia
If you want to know the answer here's the way

Just look inside this book and you will see
Everything from A clear down through Z
In the en...cyclopedia
E-N-C-Y-C-L-O-P-E-D-I-A

The things that stick in one's memory...
M-I-C, K-E-Y, O-U-S-O-B

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | "Some of you may die,
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | but it's a sacrifice
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | I'm willing to make."
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Lord Farquaad (Shrek)
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404319 is a reply to message #404306] Sun, 17 January 2021 16:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: Vir Campestris

On 17/01/2021 11:49, gareth evans wrote:
> On 17/01/2021 03:00, Peter Flass wrote:
>> JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 21:21:16 +0000, Vir Campestris
>>> <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 15/01/2021 19:19, JimP wrote:
>>>> > My mother received an encyclopedia set for Christmas before WW2. It
>>>> > stated, with scientific accuracy, that humanity would never get to the
>>>> > Earth's moon because taking the speed of a locomotive, it would take
>>>> > too long to get there. Not making it worth while for a trip. She said
>>>> > 60 miles per hour was on the chart. I said that's strange, because
>>>> > diesel locomotives at the time could go faster than that. She then
>>>> > told me it was steam locomotives they used in the chart/drawing.
>>>>
>>>> In 1938 Mallard set the steam speed record at 126MPH...
>>>>
>>>> Andy
>>>
>>> Yeah, that's why the encyclopedia made no sense.
>>>
>>
>> Encyclopedias tend to be updated relatively infrequently. I got a set of
>> children’s’ books in the 50s that had stuff dating back to around 1900. I
>> expect that encyclopedias would be similar. If she got the set in the
>> late
>> 30s it probably wouldn’t have got much updating since the Depression.
>>
>
> Diphthongs of the World unite!
>
> Encyclopaedia.
>
The missing A is the US spelling, which will be why the spiel chuckers
don't notice.

It should of course be Encyclopædia... :)

Andy
Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404515 is a reply to message #404306] Tue, 19 January 2021 13:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 7791
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 17/01/2021 03:00, Peter Flass wrote:
>> JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 21:21:16 +0000, Vir Campestris
>>> <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 15/01/2021 19:19, JimP wrote:
>>>> > My mother received an encyclopedia set for Christmas before WW2. It
>>>> > stated, with scientific accuracy, that humanity would never get to the
>>>> > Earth's moon because taking the speed of a locomotive, it would take
>>>> > too long to get there. Not making it worth while for a trip. She said
>>>> > 60 miles per hour was on the chart. I said that's strange, because
>>>> > diesel locomotives at the time could go faster than that. She then
>>>> > told me it was steam locomotives they used in the chart/drawing.
>>>>
>>>> In 1938 Mallard set the steam speed record at 126MPH...
>>>>
>>>> Andy
>>>
>>> Yeah, that's why the encyclopedia made no sense.
>>>
>>
>> Encyclopedias tend to be updated relatively infrequently. I got a set of
>> children’s’ books in the 50s that had stuff dating back to around 1900. I
>> expect that encyclopedias would be similar. If she got the set in the late
>> 30s it probably wouldn’t have got much updating since the Depression.
>>
>
> Diphthongs of the World unite!
>
> Encyclopaedia.
>

Only if you live in the backwaters of civilization. ;-)

--
Pete
Re: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #405089 is a reply to message #403353] Mon, 01 February 2021 21:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: David Lesher

> I believe that wireless energy is just smoke. Can not exist.

A prof who knew Nicola once said to us:

"It's a good thing he failed, or we'd never have the transister.

--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close..........................
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
Re: Grid capacity was: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #405091 is a reply to message #403570] Mon, 01 February 2021 22:20 Go to previous message
Anonymous
Karma:
Originally posted by: David Lesher

Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes:

> On Sat, 2 Jan 2021 19:42:53 +0000 (UTC)
> danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> wrote:

>> In <20210102170828.11c34674a8b30f337fc5bb3a@eircom.net> Ahem A Rivet's
>> Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes:
>>
>>> On Sat, 2 Jan 2021 16:29:54 +0000 (UTC)
>>> danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> well, there's always the nuclear -> steam -> turbine deal,
>>>>
>>>> Just five years away!
>>
>>> Huh ? That's what nuclear power stations have always used -
>>> sometimes with liquid sodium as a heat exchange between reactor and steam
>>> which I always thought to be a hair raising concept.
>>
>> Wait, what? You mean something promised via press release
>> back in the 1940's actually worked out?

> Yes but the 1950s cost projections turned out to be optimistic.


Just Google up Larry Householder....


--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close..........................
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
Pages (14): [ «    1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14]  Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
Previous Topic: Re: life in Switzerland, Too much for one lifetime? :-)
Next Topic: DEBE?
Goto Forum:
  

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Mon Mar 08 17:31:30 EST 2021

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02587 seconds