mrampton

There's a pretty awesome documentary series 'Diggin' in the Carts' done by Red Bull that traces the impact of 8 and 16 bit era music.

From the youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLtbJmr1WtatcUO5smuoPD... "Diggin' in the Carts" is the untold story of the men and women behind the most globally influential music to come out of Japan. This six-part documentary series will delve into the history of 8-bit and 16-bit music, and the impact it has left in the world of video games and music."

https://db.tt/vRV9VBv0

San Francisco CA, Local, Part Time | Summer Internship

Stack: Ruby on Rails

Resume: https://db.tt/Yda2zfca

Contact: m.rampton at gmail

I'm a developer turned student looking to spend the summer learning and coding; I would prefer to do this with a company (i.e. a group of peers which hopefully includes a mentor or two) but will do it on my own otherwise. In August I'm moving to NYC to attend Columbia where I'll be completing my final two years as an undergraduate in CS. I should be candid that I'm a bit out of practice on the coding front at the moment (too many science/math pre-reqs, too few programming). With that in mind I'm looking for a junior position which would hopefully provide a well defined runway for accelerating and getting back up to speed. While I've done full-stack in the past, I'm generally more comfortable on the backend; but won't turn down the opportunity to practice or work on either or both.

Ahh -- makes sense. I haven't played much with RCs or batteries in general and typically think of power in terms of cycling. 1.3kW sustained for a skateboard is rather impressive. I'm comfortable doing 20 minutes at ~310W on the bike (more like 1.24kW once you account for cycling being roughly 25% energy efficient) and it's enough wattage to get you moving pretty fast.

The batteries sound impressive. But I think statement

"...the battery needs to deliver thousands of watts of electrical power"

should read "hundreds of watts" -- the watt has a unit of J(oules)/s. Thousands of watts then refers to thousands of Joules per second. They later clarify actual power output as being a sustained 230W (or 384W for a 10sec burst).

I don't deny the risks you list, particularly when it comes to urban riding -- but on this particular stretch of road it is most certainly the cars behind you that pose the greatest risk. The cars at intersections are obviously a large risk as well, but it's offset by the fact you can see them, and thus react.

I'm sorry, but no. Going over 30 mph does not make this her fault. And becoming "wobbly" at slower speeds is not the reason riding faster is preferable and safer on these stretches. It is because the biggest risk is the car closest to you, i.e. traveling in the same direction as you. The faster you are going, the smaller the delta in speeds, the less likely you are to be hit, and the less likely you are to die from the impact when you are hit. Driving at lower speeds because you are worried about the cars in the oncoming lane puts you at greater risk to the greater threat. And 30mph is not fast enough to negate your ability to react -- unless of course the situation does that for you in its entirety.

How is 30+ mph on Skyline considered unsafe? Skyline is def. more dangerous as speed decreases -- only more so within the shadows (where the likelihood of being hit by a car driving in the same direction is much higher). You speak as though you've never known someone to be involved in an accident that was outside their power to control. Driving/riding defensively does not mean you will manage to avoid all hazards.

I suspect very few in here have experience with that stretch of road, and fewer yet have that experience as a cyclist. I've ridden past that intersection probably close to 200 times (used to do repeats of OLH and coming down 84 is safer and more fun); as far as Skyline goes, it's a very safe stretch of road.

How does the fact that she previously traveled that stretch at a reasonable 36mph contribute to the discussion? If the point is to determine her guilt, it misses the mark. It does, however, come off as insensitive to the deceased.

In any case, I've seen a lot of analysis on braking times/distance vs speed. To this I will just add that I have a number of friends who have been taken out by vehicles suddenly turning in front of them -- it is one of the great dangers of riding. As to why that happens, it's typically either: the driver failed to account for the cyclist's speed, or failed to notice the cyclist.

And as for Skyline, there are a number of factors that make it a dangerous road to be on. One is the large number of car and motorcycle enthusiasts who drive its length at reckless speeds (doesn't seem a factor here, but motorist deaths are extremely common on Skyline). Another is the high contrast lighting conditions the trees paint on the road -- something I always worry about when I ride that road for any sizeable stretch.

To be honest, speed is your friend up there. The closer your speed matches the passing traffic, the safer you are. At least until someone turns into you, and then the only safe speed would be no speed at all.

Yah, the (unintentional) near misses with cars don't get my blood boiling anywhere near the intentional ones -- though they can easily be just as frightening.

I'm in SF and you actually see very striking changes in behavior and attitude by both cyclists and drivers depending on your route/location. In SF itself, I find drivers to be pretty considerate with most of the hazards caused by drivers who aren't paying attention. But 10 miles in either direction will get you out and away from the city and bring you to more remote locations (i.e. winding mountain roads, or coastal highways, etc). I encounter far more aggression as soon as there aren't other cars around -- perhaps they're smart enough to minimize the risk to themselves (little as it is) by ensuring there aren't other drivers around to witness it.

Glad to hear it's not like this everywhere, though. And I suspect things will continue to improve here.

It's all too common (and easy) to lump cyclists into one group -- generally (in terms of policy and public opinion) in a way that encourages dislike. Cyclists are like any other subset of the population and it's unfair to any group to judge them based on the actions of others. That being that, I don't pretend that there aren't cyclists out there who misbehave -- I'm personally very aware of it because they're often the cause of me being treated badly by cars/drivers. As a cyclist, the most effective way I've found to combat this is to be courteous where it matters most -- generally by waving/nodding when you are given the go ahead to cross an intersection by a driver who has the right-away (or more generally, shown any courtesy on the road).

Now, that doesn't mean I go out of my way to exude a staid nature on the bike; I'm generally riding as fast as I care to or want to -- but the thing about being on a bike is that speed is (generally) physically governed -- I cannot ride any faster than my body allows. And in most pedestrian settings (i.e. without the presence of significant downhill stretches) this will be between 15 and 30mph (Individual TTs in the TDF will maybe see an avg speed of 30-33mph -- wattage and speed way out of the reach for anyone but the strongest riders on the most advanced machines).

I bring this up to make a point, a dangerous cyclist (i.e. the dudes you see running lights and being jerks with disregard to everyone else) is dangerous but only marginally as compared to a dangerous driver. And this is of course due to the fact that cyclists are limited to pedestrian speeds (30mph going all) and constitute a small fraction of the mass of a car (200lbs:3000lbs+). But they are dangerous (especially to pedestrians -- one reason they should never be riding on sidewalks) nonetheless and I'd love for everyone to show a little more common courtesy.

More than that, however, I wish (more) drivers were aware of how threatening they are in their vehicles (sometimes weapons). Never am I more aware of how fragile the balance of life is as when I'm on my bike with an angry driver alongside me verbally berating me. And this is because riding the bike is not as easy as driving a car in the best of times (neither of which is especially difficult) -- but in the worst of times it's much harder. And your being alongside me with your window down is about as bad as they come. Not only do I have to continue navigating the road I now also have to consider you and your intentions. You might just be someone who wants to get something off their chest and be on the their way (still far better to do it when neither of us are moving). Or you might be one of the others who will only find solace once you've swerved at the me or run me off the road (yes, I have been maliciously run off the road; no, it's not so uncommon). So my senses flare and my defensive instincts kick in any time a car rolls up with something to say because the moment you do you change from being a driver of a car to a potentially dangerous and unpredictable stranger with a weapon. I doubt I'm far from the the only one to feel this way based on how inflammatory these situations routinely become. It doesn't help that the law will generally take the side of the driver or find themselves impuissant due to the fact that cars can and do flee the scene with none the wiser (ever try to get a license plate number down from a fleeing vehicle -- they don't need much distance on you to make it hopeless)

Now that being that, I understand how easy it is to lump individuals in as belonging to "that group". Despite the number of mean spirited drivers I've encountered, they stand out only because we tend to overlook all the others who are good spirited (and thus never give you cause to notice or appreciate them -- in fact i've only been caught off guard with a car rolling up with a pleasantry/compliment two times). I personally suspect that the malicious drivers themselves are repeat offenders and are responsible for the vast majority of encounters (i.e. if there are 10,000 drivers in an area, and 100 events occur it implies 1% of drivers were involved; what's more likely is that a repeat offending driver causes multiple events over a certain route or a time period which means only a fraction of 1% of the drivers are involved).

Which means I should respect you as long as you don't threaten me, and you should respect me provided the same. But let me tell you, it takes just about all my willpower to not rip your head off when you confront me in your car while I'm already giving it my best to be courteous and safe; I do give it my best, though.

Reminded me of the Hans Rosling Ted talk on global population: http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/hans_rosling_on_global_pop...

"The world's population will grow to 9 billion over the next 50 years -- and only by raising the living standards of the poorest can we check population growth. This is the paradoxical answer that Hans Rosling unveils at TED@Cannes using colorful new data display technology (you'll see)."

Also, Facebook just doesn't handle images well; anything you upload is downsized (though I noticed they've started providing an option for Higher Quality uploads) and you have to look for outside solutions to simple tasks like downloading an album. This is one of the reasons why I upload on my posterous and have it autopost to FB.

congrats, posterous!

pretty sweet actually.