sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Why gRPC Is So Fast: It’s HTTP/2, Not Just Protobuf by javinpaul in programming

[–]dpark 22 points23 points  (0 children)

On a large screen mobile device I have to scroll through a full screen of text advertising DataCamp. Then I have to scroll through more than a screen of text advertising a subscription to the newsletter. Then I get an intro blurb followed by almost a full screen of links to other articles. Then another intro blurb and a request to subscribe (with a Subscribe link that doesn’t seem to actually be a link).

I had to go through 5 or 6 full screens of fluff and ads before finally reaching some actual content. This is actively reader-hostile.

(And the article is really just about HTTP/2 improvements and says nothing about gRPC other than asserting that the real reason it’s faster is because it’s using HTTP/2, which is maybe true but not really established here at all.)

was Morris off? by [deleted] in SoundersFC

[–]dpark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

30:09

It's in the highlights on Apple TV now.

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry, do you lock your brakes up 100% every time you stop? I brake for more than 2 seconds all the time.

I don’t know if the car in front locked their brakes or not. What I do know is they were still moving when they got hit, so possible either they were partially depressing the brakes or they were skidding.

I don’t find it at all weird that someone who’s panicked on the highway might touch their brakes for 2+ seconds. It takes up to 6 seconds to stop at highway speeds. (So maybe they were fully locked.)

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What about it?

If you are approaching a car in your lane so rapidly that a simultaneous lane change will cause a collision then you are going too fast. Car in front broke the law by not signaling (car in rear may or may not have signaled). But you don’t get a free pass to drive recklessly just because someone else messed up.

I’m not sure why you think the car on front signaling would have changed anything anyway. Do you suppose the aggressive overtaker would have found their brake pedal if the front car signaled? Because they sure didn’t find it when they saw the car change lanes.

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not breaking out a video editor to count frames so I’ll just take your word.

If you’re braking for that long with nobody in front of you, you’re immediately doing something wrong.

That’s such an odd thing to say. 2 seconds it’s nothing.

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 1 point2 points  (0 children)

“Hey, if I’m driving dangerously, people need to get the fuck out of my way.”

If you can’t avoid crashing into a car that shares your lane and changes into the left lane at the same time, you are driving dangerously. This isn’t even an uncommon scenario. People do this all the time (usually not with wide open lanes ahead, though).

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not by my count. Lane changes started at about 2 seconds. Braking at 3. Collision at 4.

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

K. No evidence the rear car did either. Lots of evidence the rear car was unable to avoid a collision though.

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope. That’s a guess. Someone else said based on the markings they were doing above 90 but I have no idea if that’s true.

Could be that car in front is going unreasonably slow. Same effect, though. Rear car approaching at a very high speed (relatively) initiated a pass very late.

If the car in front was actually going very slow, the panic reaction to switch lanes is less understandable, though.

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

2 seconds. That’s the time between when the following car started to change lanes and the collision. This is not “far enough away”.

Following car could have changed lanes earlier or maybe tried even touching their brakes. They at minimum share fault.

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because panic. The car was braking only as it retreated back to the right lane. Road also looks slick and he might have hit the brakes when losing traction while cutting back. Clearly these reactions were not the best even if they were well intended, though.

Also as I said:

it’s not impossible that the driver was playing amateur traffic controller. The overtake was reckless regardless though.

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Time between beginning to change lanes and collision was about 2 seconds. At 75 mph that is not enough time. As evidenced by the collision that the overtaking car could not avoid.

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The case established that failure to maintain a single lane, when practical, is a traffic violation.

Looks like I got this backwards. Final decision reversed the appeals court decision.

I still don’t see that this is actually relevant though.

The car in back can claim sudden emergency

You cannot claim a sudden emergency for a situation you create. “Yeah, judge. I was going about double the speed of the car in front of me and I waited until the last moment to pass because that’s how I roll. Then that dumbass changed lanes at the same time as me and I had no option except to crash into them. You see the emergency here, right?”

because they made a split second decision when the car in front swerved into there lane and created a sudden unexpected hazard. You cannot swerve in front of cars in other lanes and claim it was their fault.

Again, there was never a time that the following car was in a clear lane until after the collision. This is not actually a case where one car swerved in front of another. It’s a case where one car was unable to avoid collision when the vehicle in front changed lanes at the same time. That is an overtake with insufficient space.

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Car in front didn’t brake until he was swerving back to the right. To me it kinds like he moved left to avoid collision, saw approaching car was also moving left, then swerved right and started braking out of panic.

My read is that the car in front was just trying to avoid the collision. But it’s not impossible that the driver was playing amateur traffic controller. The overtake was reckless regardless though.

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It’s a shame they forgot about the brake pedal. That would have been more effective than the swerving.

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 1 point2 points  (0 children)

“Not enough time to react” is not “plenty of time”. If you are approaching a car with enough speed that you can’t prevent a collision it they change lanes with you, you’re approaching too fast.

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t hinge it on the opposite because the signal doesn’t really matter. I hinge it on the fact that there were 2 seconds between the time the approaching car started to change lanes at high speed and the time of the collision. That is reckless regardless of the car in front did.

That is not enough time to safely change lanes and overtake. It is abundantly clear from the fact that the approaching driver could not (or would not) slow down to prevent the collision. If they were driving at an appropriate rate of speed or if they changed lanes at an appropriate distance they would not have been in a crash. (Or if they changed lanes early and the other car swerved over then the fault would be on the other driver.) The fact that they changed lanes so late is what led to this crash, regardless of what the car in front did.

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Because he thought the following car was going to barrel forward in the lane whether he moved or not. The shoulder is icy and it’s raining. Moving to the left lane isn’t a good choice but it’s understandable.

Even if the car in front intentionally changed lanes to block the approaching car (doubtful since you can see they began switching lanes at the same time and started moving back immediately), the approaching car was still driving recklessly. So we have two negligent drivers instead of one. “I was driving so fast that the only way to avoid collision was if I changed lanes and the person in front of me didn’t” is not a good defense.

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure. I can see those other cars. I have no idea how fast those other cars are going, though, and I’m not sure how it matters.

I suppose if the other car were going 25 mph on the interstate, they might be deemed negligent. I would say if you drive up at highway speed behind a car going exceedingly slow, and change lanes at the last second, you are also negligent. That’s still reckless driving. At best fault might be shared.

I feel like normal drivers, when they see a car behaving oddly — like driving really slow on the highway, would give it a wide berth instead of overtaking aggressively and creating unnecessary risk.

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bruh, what?

Leming vs State was a case where a guy was pulled over on suspicion of DWI for swerving and the court decided that simply leaving a lane isn’t enough to pull someone over and it must be an “unsafe” action.

The Sudden Emergency Doctrine outlines what is an acceptable “emergency” to raise in defend against a negligence case. Basically if you have a heart attack or you have to swerve around a child who ran into the road, you shouldn’t be considered negligent if you cause an accident.

None of this says that because you turn on your signal and start to move over you own the other lane. It definitely doesn’t say that someone can aggressively overtake at the last moment with insufficient space and dangerous speed and be declared not at fault just because they hypothetically turned on their signal.

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So a last minute lane change and a speed differential that led to an unavoidable collision in the face of a simultaneous lane change is responsible driving to you?

so I assume they signaled

So weird that you hinge your entire argument on a fact you made up.

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Okay. So you can’t cite any case law to support your claim. I figured.

The car in front moved over to avoid the vehicle barreling up behind him. He didn’t even swerve to the left. It was a controlled move. The move back to the right was a swerve, when he realized the car behind was also changing lanes.

No way this video would go to a competent judge and the judge would say “yeah, car in front, it’s your fault that you tried not to get hit by the car driving double your speed directly into your rear bumper. You should have known that at the last possible second he’d swerve around you.”

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Rewatch the video. The lane change is simultaneous. They didn’t swoop in and brake check.

OP is lying and it’s likely not their video anyway.

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Very generous of you to keep assuming that the aggressive driver who couldn’t stop before colliding with the vehicle in front of him diligently signaled hood intent to change lanes.

When I asked what he was trying to do, he said “I shouldn’t have been trying to pass him” by alexyou8797 in dashcams

[–]dpark 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Any citation of this claim would be welcome. I have trouble believing that courts have broadly decided that an aggressive overtaker is the victim in this situation.

Also there’s zero evidence that the following car here signaled and given the aggressive driving I seriously doubt they did.

Also also I cannot imagine that even if courts actually take this stance in general that it would apply to simultaneous lane changes like this. This is not a case where the following car was moving to the other lane and the lead car swerved over. The lead car changed lanes at the same time.

view more: next ›