I get that my performance will change depending on whether I’m expecting a test or not. But I think if my car has its breaks slammed, it’s going to stop in less than 9m starting at 30km/h, regardless of whether it’s expecting it or not. It’s the stopping distance that I’m feeling is larger than it should be.

A couple questions. Is the stopping distance in this diagram the distance the car travels after the driver has completed their reaction time and started hitting the breaks? And where does the value from this distance come from?

I wouldn’t have thought to ask you before. A lot of times people just post things they find online that impact them in some way. But you seem to have a lot of knowledge that goes beyond just seeing this image.

And, anecdotally, I was driving late last night and an animal jumped out into the road ahead of me. I would like to avoid hitting an animal just as much as hitting a person. But I didn’t immediately slam on my breaks to stop the car as quickly as possible. I gradually squeezed that break pedal until I was rapidly slowing. So maybe my assumption about stopping distance is wrong. Maybe the car can stop faster, but when driven by average people it doesn’t, simply because average drivers don’t stop optimally.

And looking at 60km/h, that’s 17m/s and they are claiming a 43m stopping distance. That would be like hitting the breaks and your car just slides on the pavement for 2.5 seconds, traveling the distance of an Olympic swimming pool, before stopping. That’s only reasonable in the worst possible driving conditions. Or maybe with an enormous and heavily loaded vehicle?

Or maybe I’m being too optimistic here? Maybe these are numbers from actual accidents and in real life people hit the break slowly at first and stuff like that?

I’m trying to figure this out too. Those distances seem really suspicious. At 30km/h, I’m pretty sure I can stop my (admittedly small) car in less than 1 car length. Maybe half a car length, something like 2m? Way less than 9m.

I’m honestly having so much fun getting out in my neighborhood and completing quests

It’s okay to disagree with people. You’re being a dick while disagreeing with people, though.

I get that you’re being practical here. You’re not technically wrong, and the people who are disagreeing with you really are arguing points of nuance.

But they aren’t wrong either. That nuance matters in certain contexts.

You can pick this hill to defend. Or you can learn something that you didn’t know about the people in your online community, and probably your IRL community too.

Embrace learning something new. It will almost never be a waste of your time.

I appreciate you.

Wow. Yeah, absolutely. I had forgotten about that game until you mentioned it. Thank you for reminding me. It’s entirely unique and deserves to be remembered. But yeah, I don’t think I have it in me to replay it.

Third vote for Silverbullet here. I’m really enjoying using it.

This is exactly where I’m at too.

They wasted tons of time showing us battles between people who don’t matter just so they could work in a gratuitously long genocide as early as possible. And that means there’s no time to develop Aang’s character or relationships. So we just get wooden actors staring at the camera and saying “You are a kind and generous character. We are friends”. If they had put the characters first and trusted that the audience will care about these people without CGI battles, when they did get around to showing scenes of emotional turmoil and conflict it would have been way more impactful.

These are called “aptroynms” and Wikipedia has a great list of them and also inaptroyms. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aptronym

Yeah, my time on Beehaw is almost always pleasant. I really love seeing people arguing in the comments of a post and inevitably after a few exchanges they go out of their way to de-escalate tensions and recognize each other as people. Real conversations, real differing of opinions, but maintaining respect for people.

My coach used to tell the story of a really promising track and field athlete who might have had a serious shot on the world scene, but quit to play in his band called The Barenaked Ladies. I never fact checked that, so I have no idea if it was true or not. But it stuck with me because it made me think of all the people who might have been incredible in one field or another who just never gave it a shot.

That’s exactly what I did!

I think the important difference in this case is like the difference between a human enjoying a song that they hear being performed vs a company recording a song that someone is performing and then replaying that song on demand for paying customers.

I actually laughed out loud for a bit. This one really got me.

Yeah, that’s exactly my first thought while reading this. If I rewrote the list of achievements above to sound like I was claiming they all happened to me, and then posted it to twitter, it would be indistinguishable from most other “🙄 that happened” posts.

People will be saying similar stuff about Taylor Swift in 100 years; by definition being legendary means being unreal.

How is it I’ve been alive this long and I’ve never seen this joke made before?! It’s so simple and obvious after the fact, but completely new (to me) and a delight. Thanks!

I suppose it depends on how good of a writer you are.

Some writers can say things we all know so well that it’s like we’re finally understanding it for the first time. Some writers have a knack for delivering facts or prose with the perfect dose of humor; it’s not what they say, but how they say it that is valuable.

I suppose the question of what merits a book has is more complicated than just “does this book push the envelope of human knowledge”, huh?

I have a couple of books by Zach Weinersmith and they are entertaining and interesting.

I believe you’re missing the point of this book. I also believe you’re being a bit of a prat. I don’t know, however, if those two things are connected.