Make sure to never be in a hurry to get anywhere because you might then get stuck behind a fleet of them going exactly the speed limit, grid locking you in.
In Italy several cities lowered the maximum speed from 50 to 30 km/h.
There was a huge fight over it, car drivers in those cities were mad. Plenty of politicians opposed it.
One year later stats were super clear: streets got way safer and the number of fatal accidents dropped to near 0. Time to traverse cities didn't change much, as it was already limited mostly by traffic and lights.
I think this ignores the argument the high speed limit people make which basically boils down to "sure some people will die or get injured but its worth it because driving faster is fun"
Autonomous vehicles following proper signalling before lane changes can be safe at arbitrary speeds (see Autobahns working at all). Humans, we should limit passing speed to roughly ~5 mph delta between adjacent lanes and leave it at that.
Humans with adequate following distance in the entire lane can probably manage 10 mph delta. I routinely travel dozens of miles very safely at ~80 with the flow of traffic (including the cops), and been stressed out at 55 in the carpool lane through stop and go traffic in the right-hand lanes due to on ramps/offramps.
I think 75 is memorable and roughly in the region where the tradeoff between increased kinetic energy and decreased time to arrival per additional unit of velocity becomes untenable.
Because American drivers have normalized always driving 10 mph (16 km/h) over the speed limit.
Cops won't pull you over or write tickets if you're not at least 15 mph over, we basically don't have speed cameras, everyone's trying to win the rat race and dehumanizing other cars around them, and it's not considered morally wrong (by most) to break that specific part of the law.
So a single vehicle obeying the law will quickly get a long line of tailgaters and tailgaters of tailgaters trying to "push" the vehicle to go faster.
They can suck it, I'm not late or in a hurry, and my ancient truck, steel bumper, and class 5 receiver hitch will not be badly harmed by your plastic grille. I get better gas mileage and have a longer stopping distance when I drive the limit, and I don't care if others are honking or riding my ass because they think I should drive faster.
> my ancient truck, steel bumper, and class 5 receiver hitch will not be badly harmed by your plastic grille
I've been rear-ended in my truck, and the receiver punched a nice hole right through the radiator of the guy who hit me. Definitely fucked his car up way more than it did my truck ... except man, that is definitely one of the hardest impacts I've ever felt in my body. I now appreciate how hard the head rests really are, despite looking a little soft. I think I'd rather have crumpled crumple zones and a new truck next time.
I've actually been involved in the commissioning of an FMVSS 202a headrest strength tester.
A lot of science and work goes into the construction of those headrests - if it was less firm, you'd get a concussion from the rotational forces in the whiplash or just break your neck, more firm and you'll get a concussion from the linear impact. It's not at all arbitrary, there's a reason they are exactly as firm as they are.
On most US highways (i.e. multi-lane limited access roads), it's customary to leave a path in the left 'passing lane' for any traffic that wants/needs to go faster than you. If cars match speeds across lanes, it impedes faster traffic.
The speed limit itself is a separate convention and regulation. In some places you can be cited for obstructing traffic by going the speed limit in the passing lane if you are matching the speed of cars to your right, effectively blocking the road.
> (b) An operator of a vehicle on a roadway moving more slowly than the normal speed of other vehicles at the time and place under the existing conditions shall drive in the right-hand lane available for vehicles, or as close as practicable to the
right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, unless the operator is:
> (1) passing another vehicle; or
> (2) preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
Note this law specifically mentions "normal speed of other vehicles at the time and place" and doesn't directly mention speed limits. So by the text of this law, if you're driving the speed limit and hanging out in the left lane while the normal speed at that time is like 10 over you're technically breaking this law.
We have specific signage for highways where this is supposed to be the law.
Sometimes I an appreciate wanting to cruise in the middle lane, because ADAS level 2 systems common on cars today is far more comfortable when it does not have to deal with regular merging traffic. But aside from that, I really don't like it when people camp in the middle lane because they tend to form a pretty tight line and manage to effectively turn a three-lane highway into two single-lane highways -- hard to get through from one side to the other.
Sorry, I didn't fully explain the idiom: "centre lane" refers to the right-most (what in the US would be left-most) "fast" lane - the one closest to the centre of the highway as a whole.
To your point, I think the middle lane of a three-lane road is, ideally, the correct travel lane. Cruising there at the prevailing speed leaves one lane more lightly traveled for entering and exiting, and the other for passing. Predominantly using that lane minimizes lane changes, which are the most dangerous driving moments. You're right, though, that the strategy breaks down as traffic gets heavier, and gets ruined entirely when (as under discussion in this thread) people gum up the supposed "fast lane".
> If cars match speeds across lanes, it impedes faster traffic.
I think this undersells it a little. It does not just impede faster traffic, when the lanes are pacing each other it makes navigating harder -- simply switching lanes is more difficult. The highway moves so much more efficiently with a small but steady difference in speed between each lane.
> Results: A 5-mph increase in the maximum state speed limit was associated with an 8.5% increase in fatality rates on interstates/freeways and a 2.8% increase on other roads. In total during the 25-year study period, there were an estimated 36,760 more traffic fatalities than would have been expected if maximum speed limits had not increased—13,638 on interstates/freeways and 23,122 on other roads.
That doesn't make sense to me. If you want to change lanes, and worst case scenario you're right next to someone, go 2mph slower for 20 seconds and they'll be shifted by 60 feet. I'm sure you can plan your lane changes on a freeway 20 seconds in advance.
It is the dynamics. When lanes are pacing each other the gaps all tighten up. So sure, you can slow down a bit to find the gap behind you, except that gap is not big enough to fit in. So you turn on your signal and wait for someone polite enough to let you in, meanwhile the guy behind you is riding you like a pony because you are no longer keeping up with traffic.
When traffic isn't balled up so tight, you can plan for a lane change in advance and accomplish it without having to slow down traffic. Everything flows better.
> How do you get “stuck” behind someone doing the speed limit?
"Only 46.5 percent of U.S. drivers consider going more than 15 miles per hour over the speed limit on the freeway to be "extremely" or "very" dangerous — with 40.6 percent openly admitting to doing it at least "a few times" in the last 30 days" [1].
We have a lot of freeway speed limits that are holdovers from the last oil crisis decades ago. Cars have gotten quieter, smoother, more capable, to the point where 55 mph is kind of hilariously slow. When the legal speed limit does not reflect what most drivers think is reasonable, then we can stamp our feet and insist that the law must be right, or we could redesign the road or adjust the speed limit to more closely reflect conventional wisdom.
> we can stamp our feet and insist that the law must be right, or we could redesign the road or adjust the speed limit to more closely reflect conventional wisdom
Most Americans ignore speed limits. This stems from it being socially and legally problematic to permanently revoke our driver’s licenses. We should raise a lot of limits. But many others are fine and still sped through.
Where do you guys have 55 mph where it's not appropriate? A LLM is telling me that 55 mph is your random urban interstate. The equivalent where I live is 80 km/h on motorways inside city/town limits, which is 50 mph, and it feels very appropriate, cars make a ton of noise and you don't want the full motorway speed in the city. And that's basically the fastest you'll ever go in a city, when it's an actual motorway (often elevated, ramps, sound barriers). Other roads (even big and important) are ~43 mph and the general urban speed limit is ~31 mph.
> A LLM is telling me that 55 mph is your random urban interstate.
Yes, this sounds about right. In the metro area, 55 mph on a limited access interstate freeway. Arterial surface streets typically 40-45 mph, lower level surface streets commonly 25 mph and sometimes 20 mph depending on locality.
In the US, in particular out west where I live, 'urban' does not have the same meaning as it does somewhere much more dense, so it amounts to 55 mph in many places you might regard as rural.
On the stretch of motorway that I frequent in Italy, the speed limit is mostly 130 km/h, but the majority of people drive at about 100 to 110 km/h (including me).
But there are also people who drive in the left lane, who will tailgate you at 1 or 2 meters because you're doing 130 km/h. These people are idiots, but you get these sorts of people everywhere.
On American freeways, you don't have a choice, every lane is doing about 10 mph over the limit (or in LA way under) and it is disruptive or dangerous not to. These freeways tend to be running at full capacity so it actually makes sense since it improves capacity.
Road capacity does not increase with speed above 50 km/h on urban roads or 70 km/h on highways. Following distance scales with speed, so more speed can actually mean fewer cars per unit of time.
In theory, braking distance scales quadratically with speed. In practice, people leave less room on highways, because they rely on others driving predictably, but spacing still increases faster than linear.
That was a sleek demo, good job! Only thing that I could nitpick is if you polished your floating toolbars to look a bit more Apple-y, this feels like something Apple is going to be sending you an acquihire for.
and also "dearrow" for good measure. it replaces the titles and thumbnails with something less sensational. not having to look at those stupid faces that youtubers make is a big plus as well
the freetube app has both of those extensions built in. you just have to enable them in the settings
Your company has a user pool, you sign a BAA or start working with a partner company that has their user pool. Instead of creating slack accounts in both you can share external slack rooms that only people that are invited in/from their respective orgs can join without having to co-mingle employee user pools.
But why would external partners want to look at your code? I guess if you're also integrating with them? But generally you just give them repo access instead. For Slack, it's different as messaging is a core feature to collaborate between different people in different companies, but looking at code is a very specific use case.
Not sure, I was only answering in regards as to what Slack shared rooms brings to the table for companies in the form of letting Project Managers/Account Managers have direct line of contact with clients.
Code wise I guess you can could be working with any agency or contractors and you could collab on PR reviews? No idea to be honest.
I had never seen Jeff's posts pop up on HN prior to this year and only learned of him via YouTube r/homelab content. Scrolling through the hn search his domain has had plenty of posts over the years, but his content has now become stickier and/or the audience has changed?
He shares the title of "SBC Guy" with ExplainingComputers. Any time a new single-board computer comes out, especially a Raspberry Pi, they make videos with benchmarks etc. etc.
He's definitely got brand recognition. He's THE guy for Raspberry Pi and SBC stuff. I'd suspect more people would recognise him then Ebon Upton nowadays. Not ignoring the other stuff he's done, but anyone into Pi/SBC will know him.
Honourable mentions to ExplainingComputers and "Platima Tinkers".
My sincerest apologies to Eben. I don't know how I flubbed that, as I opened another tab and searched for him so I knew I'd get the spelling of his surname right. A fellow Welshman and everything! I am suitably embarrassed.
This is completely uncalled for even if you disagree with his views. It's barely on topic at best (probably best avoided altogether because there's unlikely to be productive discussion here), but if you must then the correct way to do it is to say what his views are, and explain why you think they are wrong. It's not ok to call someone "a freaky little neo-nazi religious nut".
> but if you must then the correct way to do it is to say what his views are
I did. Read the end of the sentence you quoted. It's a snapshot of his hateful views. There is, however, breadth and depth to his hate. Which is I directed you a few good keywords to search his own words in context to get a taste.
I'd say take my word for it and don't waste your time. But it's your time, bud.
> Is he telling us that wives should do what they're told and that husbands can lord it over their wives? On the contrary! He speaks here about a special kind of love (married love) in which there is mutual subjection, meaning that both the husband and the wife should treat each other as equals
> Is discrimination and hatred against homosexuals wrong? Of course—these people are human beings with the gift of God's love, just like you and me! However, endorsing their lifestyle is something the Church will never be able to do, for their actions (which can be judged) are opposed to the Church's fundamental teachings about human sexuality and complementarity.
Where exactly is he saying to hate gay people and that women are owned by their husbands? Were those the posts you were referencing?
Note that elsewhere he also says that natural family planning is not endorsed by the church if done for frivolous reasons:
> The Church allows the use of Natural Family Planning for couples wishing to space out births, but only for serious reasons. A precondition to a couple using NFP is that they act not out of a selfish desire (i.e. the couple wants to have a lot of fun together, and a child would 'put a damper' on their fun), but "in conformity with the generosity appropriate to responsible parenthood" [CCC 2368]
So married hetero couples who don't even use any form of contraception, but abstain during certain times of the month because they don't want kids for lifestyle reasons are apparently opposed to the church's teachings too. Presumably he doesn't hate such people.
So is there something more hateful here? I'm seeing 15-20 year old blog posts with a few paragraphs explaining what the Catholic position on this stuff is in an almost neutral/academic tone. Where's the neo-nazi religious nut stuff?
He's a former minister who graduated college in Bible studies. As unpalatable it might be to you, his views are perfectly in line with a strong christian believer from the midwest. So I don't really see a need to bring that up when we're discussing his technical videos. It's not like he lectures you about abortion at the end of a raspberry pi video...
I disagree. Someone with these views on humanity should not have a platform. They should be shamed and shunned. They should not be an "influencer" (however minor).
Look, I grew up in a cult too (the Baptist flavor). I also grew out of it mostly unscathed. He's a grown-ass man that still believes these truly heinous things. He has not grown as person. Or addressed his ignorance. And he's never retracted or apologized for his hateful views.
Which... it's his right. He can be an asshole. But people should be informed and, like I said, he should be shunned and shamed.
I'd say read some history on effective non-carceral and non-violent ways to deal with hateful people: shunning and shaming is the best option. It lets hateful people live their lives in a bubble if that's what they want. But also gives them a chance to address their abhorrent views, make amends, and become part of a large community again.
Hmm, it never worked well for me. People just get more entrenched and resentful? What I have found works is to try and find some common ground and build up some level of mutual respect from there.
For example, I also grew up in a cult of southern baptist flavour. I've seen some fucked up shit too. Where the cult was a majority, they did a lot of shunning and shaming and that sucked. I just don't think that's right.
And why should we make the effort when they make none?
Rule of the biggest tribe with the biggest sticks still applies even today I suppose.
But one day...religion is dying out, slowly but surely. I can't wait for the day when the religious have to face what they dished out. I have no patience to teach people that who I am isn't worthy of death or admonishment again and again.
yelling at idiots idiots never work. Doing so imprint a snapshot of whatever they were doing deeper into their brains. Our brains take intersections of the zipped archives of situation logs and turn that into reproducible scripted acts. Negative emotions associated with the memory won't help the brain unlearn undesired behaviors, it just makes us sadder or angrier at scripted points.
A better, but painful, way is to somehow break the chain of undesired acts until they would be obsessed with better things to do.
Maybe there are even better ways at it and I'm mostly wrong about this - I had never taken any training to be a behavioral scientist - but my point is, point-and-screaming wrong things someone did never goes well.
But aren't you shunning OP for their view that his homophobia and misogyny is wrong and he shouldn't be supported for that reason?
As a gay man I was looking forward to reading this article because the topic sounds interesting. I'll go to war about this every chance I get.
Oh, so good religion is to hate gays, fine. Well my religion is to hate Christians and I'll secretly support and lobby for their rights to be taken away, I'll lend my voice to all the others so we can shout that Christians should not exist. Fair is fair, right?
It’s the new reality. CEO of proton says something nice about Trump? Facist! Framework is interested in DHH’s work? Cancelled! And there are countless of these example (ie in the Nix community).
As if nothing good they did matters anymore.
There seem to be a lot of people just digging to find dirt on anyone and shame anyone in their vicinity. People that don’t do anything good themselves often.
There are lines you should not cross if you want to not support Nazis. It's actually a really bright line, and supporting Trump or DHH given his recent very public posts about his white supremacy shows that you are basically not a person who is affected by the problems both of those people create when you say "as if nothing good they did matters anymore" - simply put once you throw in with a white supremacist your reputation is going to be exploded into tatters, there's no "oopsie" about it.
If you organize your folders correctly, you could probably have that dropbox folder synced with one of those services. The maintenance isn't too bad once its up and running, probably more hurdles (proxies, etc) if you are accessing outside the home. If you are the only user, you can use tailscale to access your hosted apps when out of the home.
Not sure if it happens to most, but I have looped back around to not wanting to play sysadmin at home. Most of the stuff I have running I haven't updated in a awhile, luckily since I own it and it's all internal I don't need to worry about anyone taking away my locally hosted apps. Thank the IT gods for docker compose, and tools like portainer to minimize the amount of fuddling around I have to do.
That, and I've learned the stuff I need to from my homelab. Earlier in my career, setting up a light version of a production network at home was hugely educational and I think it was a large part of why I'm a senior today. But now, I don't need to run all that at home unless I have specific learning objectives. So I keep my home network a lot simpler than it used to be, as a result.
Same, replaced the ISP router with my own and have a single box which has storage and compute for running VMs and NFS and that is it. Last thing I want to be doing on a Friday night is debugging why my home network is broken.
A handful of comments already alluded to it, but maybe YC startups aren’t as smart as they think they are when they are looking for their founding engineers. Especially when it’s just the two founders looking for find their early engineers and the one holding the mba is the one leading/hiring. East to dupe these folks early on?
I miss waiting in that large invite queue until you were finally let in, what felt like the first inbox zero proponents and possibly(?) introducing the swiping rows with different actions depending how much you swiped.
reply