Recent posts by vikaTae on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Hog the outside lane

It’s not that they’re a functioning revenue stream, more that they help keep a street safer, particularly when drivers know they will be enforced.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Hog the outside lane

Originally posted by petesahooligan:

2. It costs more in police and court time than the tickets are worth.

Cities would be happy to never write speeding tickets and save those full-time-employee salaries if they could snap their fingers and make it so.

So do it the same way the British do then. Cops here don’t write speeding tickets. Cameras by the side of the road, or sets of ‘average speed’ cameras in the middle of the road monitor the traffic, calculate the speed of each vehicle, and issue a fixed penalty notice for any speeder. Occasionally yes, it’s a roving camera with a cop behind it, parked on some junction or other or quiet strip of road with well posted limits to see what speed people are really doing there. In that case the cop also doesn’t write tickets; the camera does the same job as above.

A few days later, the notice drops through the letterbox of the registered owner of the car, delivered by the mail service. The salary-collecting police usually don’t get involved.

The recipient can still contest it of course, but unless they can prove special circumstances, all contesting it is going to do, is double the fine when the two week ‘half cost for prompt payment’ period expires.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Gay Marriage: A Great Loss for Moralism

Originally posted by slasher:

It is quite primitive to force people to marry based upon anatomy and not psychology.

How I’ve always looked at it, is a marriage is an officially recognised union of multiple individuals. So long as all involved are fully aware what they are getting into, legally recognised as being of sound mind and judgement, is not already in a different such union, and are not coerced into the union against their will, then that’s all that really counts.

Nothing about the physical structure of the participants matters in any way, shape or form.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Hog the outside lane

Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

Either way, being an asshole tailgater in the city freeways (much shorter driving times) is just stupid as fuck because, for all that dangerous driving, the tailgater likely saves only a couple of minute were they to “go with the flow”. Remember, at 60 MPH, you are traveling a mile every minute … or, 5 minutes yields 5 miles. In city driving, 5 miles would likely be a huge portion of the trip.

A good way to deal with them on any road, is to gently depress the brakes at random intervals. Press the pedal gently but stop as soon as you encounter any resistance whatsoever. This is the point the brake lights are on, but you’re not actually braking. Repeat this pattern quite a few times to get the point across, and if they still tailgate, actually begin to brake to get the point across. They’ll soon drop back, fed up of continually having to brake themselves in case they run into you.

A good way to deal with them on a narrow road is to slow right down until they decide to back off. I’ve driven at 15mph in a 40 zone before, because the 20tonne lorry behind me wished to clamber into my backseat. If I had to emergency stop at any time whilst doing the speed limit, he’d never stop in time and would probably kill me – certainly shunt me forwards through whatever I had emergency-stopped to avoid. It infuriates them, but when they stop tailgating, I stop driving slow. They start tailgating again and I slow down again. Eventually the concept of what they need to do to drive fast again percolates through even the most addled driver’s brain.

Most policing officers have a lot of discretion for deciding what would constitute reckless driving. If a driver is going at a speed that is deemed improper for “road & reason”, you can still get a ticket even if you are at/under the speed limit.

Here that would come under ‘driving without due care and attention’, and leads to both a fine and quite a few points on your lisence. (I think it’s 7 points). Get to 12 points within one year, and hey look, you’ve won a free ban from driving! congrats!

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Hog the outside lane

Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

Or, we could have a look at the Germ. Autobahn ….. NO speed limits (exceptions apply). But, if you see lights flashing in your mirror. Either get the fuck over …. OR, just maintain-the-lane because someone is about to pass by you extremely fast.

The areas that do have speed limits, only have them because of the area being a known accident risk area, or currently passing through a built up area. That said, the German idea of a ‘speed limit’ on a highway is often to restrict cars to 130 km per hour, or 80 miles per hour. Still more than fast enough.

What they do insist on however, and which they take extremely seriously, is that you maintain at least the proper minimum safe distance between you and the vehicle in front.

  
Originally posted by ImplosionOfDoom:

It’s a matter of making sure you’ve got enough distance to stop safely at the speed you’re going.

What was the old saying? Add 2 car lengths (the length of your own vehicle) per 10 miles of speed?
I usually add a bit more.

That’s a good mnemonic to use, and is close enough to work with. Also the idea of always leaving a bit more is brilliant. Knowing your vehicle is half the battle as well.

Reasonably unloaded, towing nothing, with good quality brake pads and tyres on a dry surface, my car takes ten seconds to reach a standstill from 60mph. It’s a bit longer than normal because the car is heavier and there is much more inertia for the brakes to kill. Every vehicle is going to be different according to its weight, maintenance quality, and the road conditions.

Still, in Ideal circumstances this graph is handy:

If you’re doing more than 70, as you can see, your stopping distance will become exponentially longer.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Confederate Flag and Civil Liberties

Originally posted by jhco50:

Vika, the United States is a conglomeration of small individual countries who came together under a central government but retained their independence

Originally posted by jhco50:

Keep in mind the federal forces are our kids and most of them will not go out and kill their families. It will be foreign soldiers who will be brought in to war with Americans.

By your own logic, federal officers who were born in another state, would be counted as ‘foreign soldiers’. Is that the meaning you meant? Because it sure is the argument you’ve presented.

  
Originally posted by petesahooligan:

Does that mean that a patriotic Islamic Statesman is more valuable than an individual that hates ISIS because of that patriotism? Is that the “value” of patriotism… it’s just blind commitment to an idea and unconditional love of country?

Pretty much.

The best patriots do indeed seem to be blind patriots, who do what they believe is best for their nation unquestioningly, and refuse to acceot their nation/ideology has any faults at all. Fanaticism is another word for this level of patriotism.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Hog the outside lane

It is very rare that reducing your speed could lead to an accident. Be mindful of the anger level of other drivers yes, as they may cause an accident due to roadrage. But at the same time, if you cannot cope with the current conditions slow down. Give your brain a chance to catch up.

Driving an automobile at around 30mph in a built up area occupies pretty much all the faculties of a human brain; watching out for threats, issues, and potential dangers as well as controlling the car. As you increase in speed, your available reaction time rapidly drops.

  • If someone is hit by a car at 40 mph they are 90% likely to be killed.
  • If someone is hit by a car at 30 mph they are 50% likely to be killed.
  • If someone is hit by a car at 20 mph they are 10% likely to be killed.

If you don’t feel totally in control at your current speed, or you are having trouble focussing your attention, SLOW DOWN. Doesn’t matter if it makes you five minutes later, it’s making the road safer for you and every other road user.

 
Originally posted by ImplosionOfDoom:

Really it’s not the speed that’s the most dangerous aspect, it’s simply a ‘threat multiplier’ for a driver’s already inattentive, erratic, unpredictable (or at least un-signaled) behavior and your best bet at avoiding a crash is to remain vigilant and prepared for it.

A good technique you may or may not be aware of Implosion, is to pay more attention to the wheels of the cars around you than you do to the indicators. The indicators may or may not be accurate (or even used) but the direction of the wheels tells you where that car is going to go.

Another technique that is extremely handy but not a lot of people seemingly know about, is to not just watch the vehicle in front of you, but also, if you can, watch what the vehicles in front of them are doing. You’ll be more prepared for changes in traffic flow, and won’t get caught out by sudden decreases in speed or jams, because you’ll often be slowing down before the car in front of you has even noticed there’s a problem.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Hog the outside lane

Speed is a concern James, when it comes to calculating stopping distances. That’s why it’s considered a problem.

Add inattentiveness into the equation and that’s when you get the recipe for disaster. You’re actually referring to inattentiveness when you mention cell phones – it’s not the phone that’s the problem but the lack of concentration on the road around you. It would be exactly the same if you were fiddling with the radio, reading a novel whilst driving (seen it), reading the map whilst driving (also seen it), or have just spilt a hot beverage in your lap whilst driving.

Speed itself is not a killer so long as:

  • the conditions are favourable.
  • You are aware of your stopping distances
  • You are paying full attention to the road around you with awareness of what everyone in the immediate vicinity of the road in front of you is doing.

If you find yourself struggling with any one of those three, reduce your speed.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Hog the outside lane

See my previous posting on how they don’t have to be in the road to get hit, or how it only takes a moment’s lack of thought to be in the road without thinking, especially for children.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Hog the outside lane

Heh. If you’re going to troll, at least put your brain in gear before you do so Mafefe. Or maybe you could explain to me how a seatbelt will save a pedestrian who has been hit by a vehicle?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Confederate Flag and Civil Liberties

Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

vika, “technically speaking”, the Confederate patriots were loyal to the confederation of their “own states” …. a self-declared, independent country. I see this as nothing any different than what the American colonialist did when they declared our independence from England.

True, but they also do it when their state is not a self-declared, independent country, and these people were patriotic to their state and against the country vbefore they separated as well as after. Hence my use of the modern-day examples of state militias eager to force a confrintation with federal forces, to ‘send those damn feds back where they belong’. That’s the same kind of patriotism to your state but not to your country.

Another such example would be Quebec in Canada, where the majority of individuals are patriotic to Quebec, but have no love whatsoever for Canada. It’s a limited patriotism to one’s own little area only.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Hog the outside lane

A lot of potential accidents and blockages can happen in a decade, Mafefe. Better to drive safely and responsively now, whilst we do drive ourselves around, then ignore that responsibility because ‘one day we won’t have to worry about it’.

If your driving leads to a death on the road in the time you’re still driving, you can bet you’ll remember that for the rest of your life. So, better safe than sorry.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Hog the outside lane

Originally posted by Kasic:

and am usually ~5mph faster than the speed limit, or ~10 on the highway in low traffic.

To be fair, you’re usually perfectly fine with +/- 10% of the speed limit. So in a 70mph area, you can do 77 mph perfectly legally. It’s set up that way because of variation in speedometer accuracy. In a more modern car with a more accurate speedometer you can push it a little further without a problem, whereas in an older classic car, you’ve got that extra cushioning as a nod to the fact your speedometer is likely not all that accurate.

Rather than making special laws for each car type, it’s easier just to give the 10% slack to everyone. Less confusion that way.


A bigger issue is as you say, going slower than the posted limit when you’re not convinced it’s safe to go at the limit. People behind you get annoyed very quickly if you’re going slow, and may make very rash decisions to overtake on a blind bend, or an occupied pavement (sidewalk).

An example of when I’ll slow down is in an urban area where the posted limit is 30. If I see children playing on the pavement near the curb, I’m more likely to slow down to 20, just in case one of them chases a ball out into the road, or similar. Gives more chance of braking in time. That has sometimes led to people using their horn on me or flashing me from behind. In one instance, it actually led to the van driver mounting the kerb, accelerating to the side of me, giving me his finger and having to brake hard to avoid smashing into a couple of kids who were on that same pavement (and the reason I’d slowed down)!

Whilst you cannot take responsibility for the actions of others, you can be aware of what those actions may be, and at times driving is a bit of a balancing act between driving at speeds you feel are the most safe, and not winding the driver behind up too much, if it seems likely they are going to do something foolish.

 

Topic: Serious Discussion / Gay Marriage: A Great Loss for Moralism

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Hog the outside lane

If you hog the inside lane, you’re also preventing emergency vehicles from getting through, as you’re bottlenecking traffic, and not providing anywhere for them to maneuvre. I would hope you would speed up when you see blue lights in your vear view mirror, but your post does not make this clear.

Besides, leave the speeders to the speed cameras. That’s what they’re there for. If the speeding was for a justifiable reason then the fine will be waived in court. If there was no justifiable reason, well… :)

Aside from protecting yourself from tailgaters (by depressing the brakes lightly at random intervals), there isn’t really any ‘vigilantee driving’ you should be practicing on the road.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Gay Marriage: A Great Loss for Moralism

Originally posted by wargamer1000:

‘Gay marriage’ is the failure of moderation, an unfiltered and unnatural desire opposite of a virtue.

You’re aware I trust, that just about every vertibrate species has homosexual members naturally? We have examples in the wold across many hundred different species that have been studied.

Gay relationships are not an ‘unnatural drive’, wargamer. They’re as natural as any other part of the complex biochemical processes of life. They’re certainly not unique to humans, as is the other commonly used argument trying to proclaim that gays are ‘unnatural’.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / What if Hitler won WW2???????

He would certainly put all those with physical or mental impairments into a concentration facility, yes. Slave workers until they died at best. It’s certainly a different way of handling disabilities and minority groups.

As an aside our whole concept of the welfare state arose as part of the backlash for how appaling the treatment of minorities by the Axis had been. Without WW2 and its atrocities, the social revolutions of the successive decades would never have occured. We practically required the holocaust to occur and be widely known about in order for the pendulum of social reform to swing so far the other way, towards equality.

It is a sobering thought really that without Hitler and his Third Reich we wouldn’t have half the social reforms we have today.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / What if Hitler won WW2???????

Originally posted by James146:

@Vikatae, who do you think would have won that cold war: Japan or Germany?

No real way to tell. The further down the timeline away from the point of divergence (Germany winning WW2) the murkier things get, and pretty soon there are too many variables to keep up with, even from a ‘general overview’ standpoint. We’d be looking 30 or 40 years after WW2 ended, with almost no culture in common and likely no territories in common between the two powers (No East/West Berlin analog).

It is completely unknown territory, and your guess is as well informed as mine.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / What benefits do you get out of being Satanist, that you can't get for being Christian?

Regardless of their newness, a bold claim such as “belief system X is best for everyone” is best countered by pointing out that the belief system itself really doesn’t matter and is best a personal thing, before all the fanatical adherents to differing belief viewpoints rear up and challenge. That gets…messy.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Confederate Flag and Civil Liberties

Technically you could say they were patriots to their own states rather than the United States, and patriots to their wallets. Actually having to pay the workers a living wage and start using safe working conditions would hit them in the wallet hard. After all, they had a tendency to literally work slaves to death which they could never get away with if they were actual employees.

So they had patriotism of a sort, just not to the country as whole.

If there’s any substance to it, we see a similar thing with these state militias who claim they will defend their state from the federal government with violence if need be. They are ‘patriotic’ to their state, or even to their county, but not to anything larger than that or beyond that.

 

Topic: Serious Discussion / Gay Marriage: A Great Loss for Moralism

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / What benefits do you get out of being Satanist, that you can't get for being Christian?

Originally posted by FrostyGhosts:

What’s the point of all that!? Better be atheist.

So long as the person accepts that religion is a personal choice, and doesn’t attemptto push their religion onto others, or push the dictated social behavior of their religion onto others, what does it matter what their personal choice of religion is?

If a given way is ‘right’ then congrats for that person. However, nobody in life actually knows which way is right if there even is one at all. So, attempts to ‘save’ another person, or dictate what morality should be are worse than useless – they are actually counter productive.

Each group onto their own, and let them manage the lifestyles of those who believe the same as they do, and not interfere with those who don’t. Occultist, Christian, Satanist, Atheist, Agnostic, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, Jew, Uncle Tom Cobley and all… it doesn’t matter.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / What if Hitler won WW2???????

Originally posted by spookyskeleton:

To add on to what was being said earlier, had germany won, they would not stop. After eventually defeating russia (As someone said, by building better bombs) And conquering america, they would have probably taken over japan.

Doubtful.

The US would be otherwise occupied fighting Germany and dealing with frequent rocket attacks on its home soil (followed by nuclear rocket attacks as Germany would have gained the bomb first, seeing as they were much closer to achieving their goal when the encroaching Allied forces really started destroying their experiments en-masse). A Germany winning the war would not be seeing its empires borders continually shrink as in the later stages of our war, and so the experiments would have continued undisrupted.

With the US increasingly occupied fighting a technologically superior enemy that was far more willing to innovate in warfare than anyone else was either at the time, or for a considerable period before, Japan would have been relatively free to complete its conquest of China, and most of the Pacific Asian island-states. With the bulk of Russian forces fighting a losing battle against the Germans, it is not unreasonable to assume that the Japanese would have helped themseles to Eastern Russia as well.

Ultimately you end up with a very different world map. Two superpowers dominate that map, with vast swaithes of land under their control. Germany possesses most if not all of Europe, Northern Africa, and perhaps even North America. Japan possesses most of Asia, and probably much of Oceania as well.

Japan would likely not be an easy target for Germany in this state, and the two would likely settle into a cold war mindset rather than a hot one. Neither superpower able to dislodge the other, and both entering into something of an arms race.

The US nuclear attack against Japan worked because Japan was already beaten and knew it, but simply refused to surrender, intending to fight until the last citizen fell. That’s why the nukes worked – they broke the back of the country’s resolve. Nuclear attacks against a Japan standing strong, it’s borders continually expanding, and its might clear for all to see, would not have even remotely had the same effect.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / What if Hitler won WW2???????

Originally posted by thepunisher52:

Well, even if that project has been completed, it would have been a short lived one for the moment they would start shelling, they would give their location away and will become targets to air raids.

They already were targets. But, in a war economy, the concept is quietly brilliant, because you could fill the shells with scrap metal or concrete instead of explosive and it would be just as destructive, precisely because the shell is a solid mass travelling at multiple times the speed of sound when it hits. The shell essentially atomises, and everything around it does too. It’s brilliant for a time when actual munitions are perhaps scarce, allowing the explosives you’re making to go direct to the front, and basically enabling you to fling the rubble of bombed out buildings at your enemy in shell form.

It wouldn’t have been feasable at that time to stop such a shell. You put up barrage balloons, and the shot just goes straight through them, and the resulting cloud of projectiles still smacks the target with practically the same force as the original lump. Heck, in theory it could go through a building in front of the target, and still strike its target with lethal force, dumping obscene amounts of kinetic energy into the ground at the target location.

Once you switched on, you could pretty much just keep on firing. Fling shell after shell after shell without stopping. Sortof like a machine gun designed to take down cities.

It doesn’t really matter that you’ve given away your location when when you’re lobbing that kind of inert firepower. By the time their bomber squadrons reach you, you’ve reduced the bases they came from, to rubble.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / What if Hitler won WW2???????

Another fun weapon the Germans had was the V3, a mixture of fuel propellant and magnetically accelerated projectile. Used a 2km long magnetic accelerator rail to launch at high mach speeds. Basically a railgun for warship shell-sized projectiles.

The Germans never got to use the V3, because the Allies bombed the two partially complete launching rails into the ground towards the end of the war. In a different war where the Germans were still holding their own, the V3 would definitely have broken the back of allied resistance.