Just updated the answer page with the solution to number 833, it's a wrench
for twisting wires, patent number 338,659.


Also updated the answer for the optic traffic detectors, I sent an email
asking how they worked and the reply stated that these detectors use simple
video technology to capture an image of the approach. When a vehicle enters
the detection zone this image changes and the camera sends a signal to the
controller that a vehicle is in a particular lane waiting for a green light.

http://pzphotosan145t-5.blogspot.com/


Rob

Just updated the answer page with the solution to number 833, it's a
wrench
for twisting wires, patent number 338,659.

O.K.

Also updated the answer for the optic traffic detectors, I sent an email
asking how they worked and the reply stated that these detectors use
simple
video technology to capture an image of the approach. When a vehicle
enters
the detection zone this image changes and the camera sends a signal to
the
controller that a vehicle is in a particular lane waiting for a green
light.

Which means that it *is* still a video camera -- just that the
image is processed by a machine, looking for changes in specific zones.
And I'll bet that there is also provision for actually viewing what they
are showing, in case of things not changing for too long a period, which
might indicate a serious traffic jam, or an accident.


I based my original post on info from an article on the detectors in which
they state:

"Motorists have been noticing an increasing number of intersections where
camera-like devices have been mounted pointing down at traffic. The units
which are not really cameras and do not video anything are highly sensitive
optic detectors used to control the traffic signals."

They probably could just switch the software and use them to see the traffic
but it sounds like they aren't set up for that presently.


Rob

R.H. wrote:

"Motorists have been noticing an increasing number of intersections where
camera-like devices have been mounted pointing down at traffic. The units
which are not really cameras and do not video anything are highly sensitive
optic detectors used to control the traffic signals."

They probably could just switch the software and use them to see the traffic
but it sounds like they aren't set up for that presently.

George Orwell's singing, "1984 here I come, doo dah, doo dah!"

R

On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 07:44:07 +0000, Gunner wrote:

Personally, Ive noted 2 rear end accidents because of cameras and afor
the reason given above, in the last 3 yrs. And a ****load of "almosts",
including one I nearly plowed into the back of a woman in an SUV who
slammed on her brakes as the light turned yellow..at 45 mph..with me
behind her pulling 1800lbs on a trailer with no trailer brakes.

In other words, you were following too close, and are culpable.

It's wrong to protect the negligent from the consequences of their own
negligence, albeit there's something to be said for protecting innocent
bystanders from the inevitable destructive results of that negligence.

Want safe cars? Here's a really simple redesign:
http://www.abiengr.com/~sysop/images/Safe-Car.gif

Thanks,
Rich

On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 23:24:48 +0000, Rich Grise wrote:

On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 07:44:07 +0000, Gunner wrote:

Personally, Ive noted 2 rear end accidents because of cameras and afor
the reason given above, in the last 3 yrs. And a ****load of "almosts",
including one I nearly plowed into the back of a woman in an SUV who
slammed on her brakes as the light turned yellow..at 45 mph..with me
behind her pulling 1800lbs on a trailer with no trailer brakes.

In other words, you were following too close, and are culpable.

It's wrong to protect the negligent from the consequences of their own
negligence, albeit there's something to be said for protecting innocent
bystanders from the inevitable destructive results of that negligence.

Want safe cars? Here's a really simple redesign:
http://www.abiengr.com/~sysop/images/Safe-Car.gif

If that design guaranteed safety then motorcycles would be the safest
vehicles on the road. It's actually pretty close to a VW Microbus or any
number of vans, none of which have a particularly shiny safety record.

Hell, horse drawn vehicles occasionally suffered fatal accidents, and there
you have not only the driver's instinct for self-preservation in play but
also that of the horse.


--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 00:00:10 +0000, J. Clarke wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 23:24:48 +0000, Rich Grise wrote:
....
Want safe cars? Here's a really simple redesign:
http://www.abiengr.com/~sysop/images/Safe-Car.gif

If that design guaranteed safety then motorcycles would be the safest
vehicles on the road.

It guarantees safety for the passengers, because the idiot driver hits
first.

It also throws a little chlorine in the shallow end of the gene pool ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

http://puzzlephotos.blogspot.com/


840: a Piton. Rockclimbing, mountaineering

In article , Rich Grise
wrote:

Want safe cars? Here's a really simple redesign:
http://www.abiengr.com/~sysop/images/Safe-Car.gif

How about safe sex?
http://www.texarkanarocks.com/forum/...019544da393e2a
0d8.gif