Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Science Technology

Intelligent Road Studs 113

Posted by timothy from the easy-there-stud dept.
Copley writes "The BBC have a short story about 'intelligent' cat's eyes (reflective road studs). I remember reading about the principle of these years ago. It seems that they've reached the real-world trial stage. The whole concept is pretty cool - the studs monitor weather and traffic speeds and change their colour accordingly. As you drive along, rather than see your own headlights reflected, you see a line of active lights indicating what you can expect ahead of you: stationary traffic, ice, etc. As I recall, one idea proposed was for your own car to leave a trail of lights behind it, the length of which related to your speed. The trail thus indicated the 'danger-you-are-too-close-you-moron' zone behind you. Drivers could then avoid driving within another car's trail. Neat idea, but I somehow doubt even the most technical of safety systems is ever going to change the driving habits of some of the brain-dead, tail-gating idiots I often have to share the roads with... Perhaps intelligent road studs with assault weaponry to take out bad drivers would be more useful!"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intelligent Road Studs More

Intelligent Road Studs

Comments Filter:

  • Major improvement (Score:3, Funny)

    by thelenm ( 213782 ) <mthelen.gmail@com> on Wednesday April 21, 2004 @05:12PM (#8933557) Homepage Journal
    This will be a major improvement... most of the studs I meet on the street are idiots.

  • I like to think of myself... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Lendrick ( 314723 ) on Wednesday April 21, 2004 @05:14PM (#8933573) Homepage Journal
    ...as in intelligent road stud.

    Or something.

  • i'd like to see them work, but not here (Score:4, Insightful)

    by lambent ( 234167 ) on Wednesday April 21, 2004 @05:17PM (#8933597)
    Too many hosers with a liscense already treat driving like a video game. And when people start paying too much attention to the blinking lights embedded in the roads ... watch out.

  • An idea who's time... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ferralis ( 736358 ) on Wednesday April 21, 2004 @05:20PM (#8933622) Homepage Journal
    ...may never come. These would be quite interesting in other applications, but it seems to me intelligent signs using E-Paper technology could convey information in a more intuitive manner than color-changing reflective studs.

    Cars, too, are being designed with more and more impressive technology, many are capable of noticing that you are tailgating, some may even begin to slow the car automatically soon (a system I'd be quick to disable... having the car take over unexpectedly would quickly cause me to froth at the mouth).

    If the studs were ever cheap enough per-unit, though, I can imagine all kinds of other uses for them... an array of 'em would make things disappear nicely to a casual glance if they merely changed color to match their surroundings...

    • (a system I'd be quick to disable... having the car take over unexpectedly would quickly cause me to froth at the mouth).

      Chips already regulate speeds in cars now. Police Crown Victorias are almost completely stock, just without the 'Guv chip. Automatic trannies have been taking over for years, as well.

      Not that any of this is wrong, it's just up to you to decide how much control you want to give up to your car. Me, I'm a control phreak :)

      • *heh* Too true... but having the car actually accelerate (even if only to slow down) without my direct control would be the last straw.

        Ok, so help me out... how the heck was my post "Redundant?" M2, anyone? :P

        • Ok, so help me out... how the heck was my post "Redundant?" M2, anyone?

          I take it you've never experienced the joy of an unwarranted down-moderation before?

          Doncha just wish /. mods would grow up?

      • Re:An idea who's time... (Score:5, Informative)

        by zero_offset ( 200586 ) on Thursday April 22, 2004 @06:50AM (#8937328) Homepage
        Chips already regulate speeds in cars now. Police Crown Victorias are almost completely stock, just without the 'Guv chip.

        Not even close. Cop Crown Vics get different suspension, transmission, rear-end, wider rims and tires, different headers, a larger fan and radiator, an oversize alternator, 4-wheel disc brakes (stock has drums in back), a more powerful AC compressor, and stiffer springs and shocks. None of these items are stock, and most of them are not available as an option to the public (new from the manufacturer, anyway). If the locale can afford it, other items are available like a small screw-drive motor to crack the hood open from inside the car, a second battery, battery relocation to the trunk, and bumper upgrades. Then of course, you have all the usual cop equipment (lights, radios, cages, etc).

        So, no, they don't just have an ungoverned engine.

        A good friend of mine used to do final prep on cop cars at a local dealership that cranks out about 1000 cop cars per year.

    • Cars, too, are being designed with more and more impressive technology, many are capable of noticing that you are tailgating, some may even begin to slow the car automatically soon

      I've always been in favor of Annoyatrons for this kind of enforcement, rather than outright control. You just never know what's going to happen that means your life suddenly depends on defeating the automatics.

      If you're trying to get away from car-jackers (or whatever other unlikely scenario; it will doubtless happen to someon

      • Good idea, if I am. The thought of annoyance warnings, followed by automatics overriding your control for persistant bad behavior... not bad at all!

        And, of course, for student drivers the automatics could be engaged by default (different key, license rfid, whatever)...

  • Idiots (Score:5, Funny)

    by Dinglenuts ( 691550 ) on Wednesday April 21, 2004 @05:32PM (#8933754)
    "...but I somehow doubt even the most technical of safety systems is ever going to change the driving habits of some of the brain-dead, tail-gating idiots I often have to share the roads with..."

    I'm sick of you slowboat assholes lambasting brave souls like me and my fellow tailgaters, who selflessy put ourselves in danger every day to eliminate the wasted space you "safies" use to create those awful traffic jams. We're heros, and we know it, quit oppressing us.

    • Re:Idiots (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I know you are being sarcastic, but I got rear ended twice in one month, despite having DOT regulation reflective tape accross the rear end (the stuff semis use) and working brake lights. Hell, I even got rear ended while accelerating. I am shooting the next person who hits me dammit. And I speed far more then most people.

      I learned A) people are idiots and assholes. Always. B) never drive during commute hour in Virginia or DC. The drivers are so bad, some insurance companies dropped their coverage of the a

    • Re:Idiots (Score:1, Redundant)

      by Mr. Piddle ( 567882 )
      who selflessy put ourselves in danger every day to eliminate the wasted space you "safies" use to create those awful traffic jams

      Tailgating kills people. How's that for a wrench in your humor machine?

  • Trail of lights (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Rufus88 ( 748752 ) on Wednesday April 21, 2004 @05:44PM (#8933858)

    your own car to leave a trail of lights behind it, the length of which related to your speed
    Simple design: each light stays on for two seconds after you pass it. This enables drivers behind you to obey the "two second rule". If you come upon lights before they go out, you know you're following too closely.

    • Re:Trail of lights (Score:4, Funny)

      by jhoffoss ( 73895 ) on Wednesday April 21, 2004 @06:06PM (#8934021) Journal
      Really though, is counting to two that difficult?

      • Re:Trail of lights (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Rufus88 ( 748752 ) on Wednesday April 21, 2004 @06:10PM (#8934057)

        Really though, is counting to two that difficult?
        No, but keeping track of the precise spot on the road where the other guy was when you started counting, can be difficult.

      • Re:Trail of lights (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 21, 2004 @06:32PM (#8934218)
        Clearly the difficulty of driving properly is not the cause of tailgating. There's two kinds of tailgaters, aggressive and ignorant. Ignorant tailgaters scare me the most. I can yield to an aggressive one and since I try my best to yield to faster traffic, that's not a problem for me. Ignorant tailgaters will follow people for miles without even trying to pass. I've been forced to change lanes (left), hit my brakes, and pull back into the right lane. That's after passing half a dozen exits, flashing my brakes, and changing speed.

        The lights might help the ignorant ones, but I doubt it. My best friend's wife tailgates. If there is a car in front of her, she's always under 1/2 car length behind. The speed doesn't matter. I was riding shotgun and a guy in front of her drove on the shoulder to splash her with mud. When he did it the second time, she said, "He's doing that intentionally!" I said, "Maybe he doesn't like being tailgated." "Oh, that's not it," was all she said. Later, she totaled her car in the rain. She ran into the car in front of her. To her, it was their fault for stopping too fast. She still drive the same.

        Would these lights make a difference? Probably for a few drivers. Enforcement would help, but on freeways I only see speeding enforced. I've seen people driving so close to a cop car, they are under two seconds behind the car in front to the cop. Yes, he's tailgating too.

        Uhm. . .
        Rant off!

        • Re:Trail of lights (Score:1, Funny)

          by Anonymous Coward
          I know what you mean about those damn tailgaters. I hate them all. And you're right, the agressive ones are the easiest to deal with. I just take my foot off the gas and gradually slow down until they zip around me in a fit of rage. They're too busy speeding along and saving precious fractions of a second to act out on that rage, so I figure it's a pretty safe method overall. In a 65 MPH zone where everyone's going 70+, they usually get the hint by the time I hit 60.

          The passive ones suck, though. They
          • Of course, by the time you are much slower than the surrounding traffic, it is impossible for the tailgater to change lanes to zip around you (since he didn't leave himself any acceleration room). I've done this sort of thing, slowing down gradually in front of a tailgater, right to the point of a complete stop. Funny, though, when I accelerated afterwards, he didn't follow me nearly as closely.
      • I'm really good at it. It only takes me a quarter of a second. So it's totally useless unless I want to tailgate.
      • Really though, is counting to two that difficult?

        You have to ask? That was you behind me on the way home! Admit it!

      • Really though, is counting to two that difficult?

        Many drivers apparently can't count to one. I think quite a lot are counting the Roman way: starting from 1, waiting a second, then thinking "2! I'm 2 seconds behind; that's okay then".

        Anyway, 2 seconds is only valid at 40mph (according to the UK Highway Code, which admittedly makes conservative assumptions about reaction time and braking force); at 60, you'd need over 2.5 seconds, and 3s at 70.

        15 feet behind at 70mph (like the f*ckwit following me this

      • Really though, is counting to two that difficult?

        Since I got into computers the only numbers I now know are 0 and 1. Does that make me a binary idjit?
  • Drivers could then avoid driving within another car's trail.
    Pretty much everywhere I've driven in North America if you "avoid driving in another's trail" you'll have two or three cars pull in between you and that other car. If you then slow down for them it will happen again; iterate until you're pretty much standing still and everyone else is passing you on both sides. You'll be lucky if they just honk and wave their middle finger.
    • If you are willing to drive 10mph slower, except on the hilly parts, you can usually drive in the right lane on interstates around here. Just slip in between some semis and don't pass them unless a hill comes. Truck drivers are a usually lot nicer than the car and SUV drivers, in Virginia at least. Just remember they can't stop as fast, so give them some room when you get in front of them.

      Yeah, it'll take a few extra minutes, but it's a lot more leisurely drive, most of the time. Since I have very litt
      • I'm sure on rural intestates that is fine, but in any freeway with many on and off ramps driving in the right lane is positively dangerous. People come flying into the lane to exit at the last minute, or cars come onto the freeway going way too slow.

        I've heard that in some European countries the custom is to only use the right lane (or left if it was the UK) for people that are merging on or off the freeway, making things much safer overall.

        • I don't care what you use the right lane for, but the left lane is for passing. How people don't know this, I don't understand.

          Tailgating is, of course, VERY BAD. Other shitty drivers are no justification. Now that I've got that established, I'd like to also mention that 90% of the tailgaters that I see on the road are tailgating because some other idiot is blocking the passing lane.

          Being in the passing lane is a RESPONSIBILITY. Look in your rearview mirror. Now that you are in the passing lane, you ar

    • LIER! (Score:3, Informative)

      by bluGill ( 862 )

      You lie. I drive 2-3 seconds behind the car in front of me, and cars to not constantly pull in filling the gap. One will here and there, but not constantly. In a 10 mile stretch today it amounted to 3 cars. This in stop an go traffic. That is one reason for the gap: leaving room for others, and those who did switch in front of me stayed in that lane for miles.

      The gap has 3 purposes. First, safety, you can't react in under 1.5 seconds, so 2 seconds is minimun time distance. (You can fake it when cl

    • Pretty much everywhere I've driven in North America if you "avoid driving in another's trail" you'll have two or three cars pull in between you and that other car. If you then slow down for them it will happen again; iterate until you're pretty much standing still and everyone else is passing you on both sides.

      I got a driver's recently (and I'm not that young) and this was one of the first things I noticed. Sometimes I just let car after car cut in in front of me, but recently I've decided that that is mo

    • Re:Following distance? We don't need no stinking f (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Grab ( 126025 ) on Thursday April 22, 2004 @05:39AM (#8937126) Homepage
      Our company works for Ford. First trip to Detroit, having never driven on the right before, I rode with an American colleague to see what to expect. First ten minutes were a real white-knuckle job, but I hate back-seat drivers myself so I didn't want to say anything. Eventually I had to say tactfully, "People seem to drive an awful lot closer to each other over here." Reply was something like, "Oh yeah, we don't much bother with stopping distance over here. You get used to it."

      And eventually I did get used to it. There were so many factors against me on that first trip: never driven on the right before; never driven an automatic before; in a strange car (Taurus) which apparently has no suspension, triggers its ABS at the slightest provocation, feels about 20 feet wide and accelerates like a slug (in spite of its V6 engine); on roads where the freeways are so badly potholed that even the worst, smallest country road in Britain is in better condition; don't know how US traffic systems work; don't know my way around town; and in a town which apparently thinks putting a signpost right on the exit to say "hey, you missed your turn, sucker" is a good method of traffic signing. It was a real thrill ride.

      And IN SPITE of all that, at my very worst, with everything conspiring against me, my driving was no worse than what I saw every day from regular Detroit citizens! :-)

      Grab.
      • A Taurus is pretty much bottom-of-the-line transportation short of a cheapy import like a Kia or whatever, so take that into account. It's the car you buy when (1) you don't much like or pay attention to cars, and (2) both of your jobs involve the phrases "sales associate" and "department store". Or (3) you work for Ford, and they just give you one.

        Additionally, Detroit has a well-deserved reputation for having some of the worst roads in the country. This is ironic considering how important it's supposed t
      • Our company works for Ford.

        Given how you described the Taurus, I'd guess not much longer ;-)

        • Re:Following distance? We don't need no stinking f (Score:4, Interesting)

          by Grab ( 126025 ) on Thursday April 22, 2004 @12:20PM (#8939876) Homepage
          Actually we're *owned* by Ford, so we're (relatively) free to hold opinions... :-)

          Everyone at Ford knows the Taurus was a dog - it's not news. The more interesting question (which they're still trying to answer) is how they managed to get the Focus handling so wrong on the US model, when they got it so right on the European version.

          On the plus side, check out the Hybrid Escape when it comes out. It's not like earth-shattering performance (hell, it's an SUV, what do you expect? ;-) but it's a pretty sharp bit of kit. Electric motors give a really good boost at low revs - no waiting for torque converters to spin up or stuff like that. Generally it's pretty nice to drive. And (finally!) electric power assist steering, which is the Right Way To Do It.

          Grab.
    • You'll be lucky if they just honk and wave their middle finger.

      Isn't that more properly referred to as the driving finger?
    • Not necessarily the case. Have a look at this site about 'traffic waves'. http://www.amasci.com/amateur/traffic/traffic1.htm l
      If everyone left room for people to get in front of them, surprise! everyone would still get where they were going, maybe a minute or so slower.
      That site has some interesting ideas I try to implement in real life. Strange thing is, my frustration level goes down, not up, when I apply those principles.

  • think of the kitties! (Score:4, Funny)

    by nekoniku ( 183821 ) <justicek&infosource,info> on Wednesday April 21, 2004 @05:45PM (#8933875) Homepage
    Finally! This innovation will put a stop to the cruel extrication of real cat eyes for roadway use.
  • Great. I sure hope they don't bring this technology to the US. The last thing I want is to see my bio professor stripping by the side of the road....urgh old fat guy.

    -Grump

  • snowplows say no (Score:3, Informative)

    by ghostlibrary ( 450718 ) on Wednesday April 21, 2004 @06:32PM (#8934223) Homepage Journal
    'round here, they can't even keep the little reflective bevels in the road. Snowplows tend to rip them up, though it takes a few snowfalls.

    So expensive little sensors, they're just snowplow bait. Roads take a tremendous amount of abuse.

    • Re:snowplows say no (Score:3, Interesting)

      by delus10n0 ( 524126 )
      Every road I've seen which expects snow-plow usage has it's cat eyes sunken below the road level (about half an inch) with little bevels on each side, to prevent the snow plow from tearing them up every time it clears the road.
  • Perhaps intelligent road studs with assault weaponry to take out bad drivers would be more useful!

    I believe we've had those for a while. They're called "mines." :-P

    ~UP
  • Around here, we call 'em turtles.
  • One idea that I've heard suggested for tailgaters is a mechanism you build into your trunk that sprinkles a little gravel out. If it doesn't back them off, it dings up their windshield and car body so you at least get some satisfaction. You wouldn't want it to dump a lot of gravel and cause a traffic accident, though.

  • fog prone areas (Score:4, Insightful)

    by 74Carlton ( 129842 ) on Wednesday April 21, 2004 @07:13PM (#8934517)
    Fog prone areas could definitely benefit from the trail of lights based on speed idea, since you wouldn't actually have to see the person in front to know they were there and how far back to be. Well, really if it's that foggy you probably shoudn't be scooting down the highway, but that never stops folks.

  • No State-Owned Ordinance Required! (Score:4, Funny)

    by GypC ( 7592 ) on Wednesday April 21, 2004 @08:19PM (#8934993) Homepage Journal

    Perhaps intelligent road studs with assault weaponry to take out bad drivers would be more useful!

    Hmmm. A trunk-mounted proximity detector coupled to a pair of M2s [warships1.com] would be simple enough... wouldn't leave much room for the groceries, though.

  • it's not the tailgaters (Score:3, Flamebait)

    by glassesmonkey ( 684291 ) on Wednesday April 21, 2004 @08:27PM (#8935046) Homepage Journal
    ..going to change the driving habits of some of the brain-dead, tail-gating idiots I often have to share the roads with... Perhaps intelligent road studs with assault weaponry to take out bad drivers would be more useful!
    Maybe if you'd stop driving too slow in the left lane, you wouldn't have to worry about tailgaters. I have yet to see a speed demon come up on a car in the furthest right lane and tailgate them when the passing lanes are wide open. I'm willing to bet a front mounted loud speaker system that says "LEFT LANE IS FOR PASSING, MORON" would be more useful.

    • No, but I have been in the left lane, safely passing traffic, and had someone come up behind me and tail gate me. I do use the left lane for passing, when when I'm doing 70 in a 70 zone, and the guy in the right lane is doing 68 it will take some time to pass. Just relax, as soon as I'm safely around I will get into the right lane and let you by. (Note the safety part, just because my back bumper is by his front bumper doesn't mean it is safe for me to merge)

  • brain-dead tail-gating idiots (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Bastian ( 66383 ) on Thursday April 22, 2004 @01:08AM (#8936281)
    My job is collecting data about highways, mostly pavement quality. It's done from a platform (van) moving at highway speeds, and can involve a fair amount of erratic driving.

    Tailgaters are a serious problem for me, as are all the other kinds of "me-first" assholes I have to deal with all day every single work day. I won't even start on drunk drivers (except maybe to point out that Tennessee and Georgia, among others, really need get their acts in gear w/r/t DUI). Thanks to folks like this, car wrecks are a fact of life for me, and there's little I can do to avoid it except take comfort in the fact that my van is heavy enough that it is almost guaranteed to clean house in a fight with most any other car on the road.

    What I find most amazing about these people is that absolutely nothing can get them to change their driving habits. Even with the van blinking and flashing like a Christmas tree from Hell and a huge sign on the back warning people to stay the fuck back because of sudden braking and such, a lot of folks still like to ride my bumper.

    Only they aren't even riding my bumper, because to get to the bumper you'd have to make it through all the equipment that bristles from the van. Which makes the whole tailgating thing really amazing to me. I don't expect people to know that rear-ending me would result in their being responsible for a six (possibly even seven, depending on what gets broken) digit repair bill, but I do find it amazing that there are so many people who are too stupid to realize that their front bumper is only a few feet away from something they probably can't afford to bang a car into. I'm especially perturbed by the fact that weather conditions don't seem to have much effect on their ability to come to this realization, either

    (I also think that most people must be a whole to more rich than me, because there is almost nothing that rolls down the highway that I could afford to bang my car into.)

    So yeah, I don't think that these smart cat-eyes will have any noticeable impact on the way people drive.

    I can't see the true spirit of friendship and cooperation ever infecting the vast majority of humanity - at least not here in the USA - so I imagine the only thing that would make folks drive in a more sane manner is to create some sort of consistently enforced and difficult to avoid method of punishing bad drivers or rewarding good drivers. Cops and speed traps don't help much because there are very few of them and they generally can't easily catch stuff like tailgating and reckless driving. The only thing I can think of is some sort of omnipresent Big Brother system that can always see every car, at least on major roads.

    I'd also like to see better punishments. Speeding tickets hurt a lot if you don't have a whole lot of money, but are little more than a slap on the wrist for other people. I'd rather see something that is directly related to driving (thus keeping a better associating with driving habits, which would hopefully increase the salience of the punishment for behavior-changing purposes). For example, folks who get two moving violations in a year could be banned from using the interstate highway system for 1 or more years.

    • I'd also like to see better punishments. Speeding tickets hurt a lot if you don't have a whole lot of money, but are little more than a slap on the wrist for other people. I'd rather see something that is directly related to driving (thus keeping a better associating with driving habits, which would hopefully increase the salience of the punishment for behavior-changing purposes). For example, folks who get two moving violations in a year could be banned from using the interstate highway system for 1 or m

      • In Australia there's a points system. A minor speeding infringement is 1 point. ... If you lose 12 points in 3 years then your license is revoked for a minimum of 3 months (longer suspensions for more serious offences).

        Many U.S. states have point systems as well. But the system you use doesn't really matter if there is not sufficient enforcement, which seems to be the case in much of the U.S. And if you do catch people and take away their licenses, there needs to be some serious consequences beyond that

        • My state, (Illinois) has a points system. From what I can see, its biggest failure is that folks (a couple of my friends, for example) will collect points until they're about to lose their licenses, then be good little children until their points are reset.
      • Fines on the Autobahn, as I recall, are proportional to income. Tickets of 30000 euro or more have been written.

        Just think how much Bill Gates would pay for a speeding ticket. That would be a happy day for the Washington state troopers.
      • Not in Sweden, but every now and then the papers are having fun with some multimillionaire in Finland who is caught speeding, having to pay a medium sized fortune because of it.
    • Why the hell do you have expensive equipment hanging off the back of your vechile? Why not the front? I'd love to see your bosses reaction if some one ruins your equipment, but doesn't toch your car and keeps on driving.

      Actually, I love seeing that almost everyone that really complains about interstate drivers are those that have to work on the road. I don't care that you have to work or that truckers, salesmen, or highway repair crews have to work on the interstates all day long.

      I got my license, and I c
      • There's equipment on the back of the van for two reasons - sometimes there's already equipment on the front of the van, and sometimes you can't put it there because it would obstruct the driver's view.

        I suppose all the highway quality monitors and road construction workers should change jobs to make room for you to drive like an asshole. Then it would be fun to see you complain that the highways are nothing but a mess of potholes and wonder why nobody is fixing them. Maybe the truckers can quit their job
        • Nah, I just just don't want you to complain to people that might change laws. Why don't you have a special trailer for all your equipment? Then, any truck could pull it along the highway.

          I don't mind folks using the highway; I mind them complaining to those lawmakers because then laws get made that I'm supposed to obey.
          • You know know that I think about. What special highway measuring devices are on your truck? It'd be nice if a subset of that could be mandated on all vehicles and with mandated GPS all vehicles on the road could detect and report problems to DOT or what ever agency monitors the highways and streets. It would be nice knowing that streets were repaired based on the number of cars that are actually reporting problems.
    • My job is collecting data about highways, mostly pavement quality. It's done from a platform (van) moving at highway speeds, and can involve a fair amount of erratic driving.

      What do you do, swerve to hit all the potholes?
    • Actually, what might be neat once all of our cars are wire(less)d up with bluetooth / wifi would be some type of "moderation" system. Cars that are hooked in to this wireless network could chat with each other (probably not good :P ) or virtually "tag" cars that they notice driving recklessly. Cars could probably be identified via RFID tags that will no doubt be on our registration stickers by then. Then other participants would be notified when cars tagged as reckless approach.

      Cops could certainly go

  • Wouldn't the optimum length of the trail depend on the speed of both the leading and the following car?

    Imagine a tractor driving at night on a highway... The road studs light up for a few seconds after it passes, but if a following car is travelling at the speed limit, this may not be enough warning to change lanes.

    • The length of the trail would change based on the speed of the vehicle. If each stud turned on for two seconds after it was passed, then a fast vehicle would turn on more studs in the same period of time that a slow moving vehicle. Meanwhile, the vehicle behind would simply want to avoid being in the lit up area (that's the two second rule. Thus, the faster two vehicles are traveling, the farther a part they will become.

Slashdot Top Deals

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Close