The drivers license thread
-
Failed my first practical driver's test because the the person doing the testing had such an aggressive demeanor that I was literally afraid of him and shaking in fear, which is not conducive to a smooth launch with a clutch. Also had a lot of trouble with a whole bunch of maneuvers that had never been an issue before, and never since.
-
I passed first time despite stalling the engine, because I recovered correctly. I also can't have made many mistakes at junctions or with keeping looking in mirrors.
It wasn't the first time I was scheduled to have a test though. That time got cancelled due to a heavy snowfall the night before. Main roads were reopened by the time morning came, but not the side roads around the test centre…
-
Passed my test on the first try, too. Though the examiner remarked on my having overtaken a cyclist rather closely - said cyclist was a teacher at my school which the examiner knew. Hence his remark: "He isn't exactly your favourite teacher, is he?"
-
I have nothing to add, but I'm posting in the hopes Discourse will unfuck itself.
-
Good luck with that.
-
I started driving in an urban suburb of Boston--Salem--so I spent the time to have a driving instructor. This guy was an ex-cop, and he had an advantage that all the test instructors knew him, and that if he said you were ready for the test, you were. Thus, anyone who took the test after he said you were ready, generally had an easy test and was more or less guaranteed to pass. Mine was pretty short.
-
-
Salem, MA, is not exactly a bedroom community. But it's not part of Boston proper.
-
The concept “urban suburb” makes sense to me; once you start to really get cities running together, you tend to end up with one city being the real centre and other settlements around it acting as subsidiary urban centres and suburbs at the same time.
A lot of larger cities work that way in Europe.
-
Amusingly I read something last night using the same term. I thought I had more or less made it up. It does sound like an oxymoron but it serves nicely to distinguish city vs, say, bedroom community.
-
The concept “urban suburb” makes sense to me; once you start to really get cities running together, you tend to end up with one city being the real centre and other settlements around it acting as subsidiary urban centres and suburbs at the same time.
AKA: sprawl.
-
Sooo. We may hereby conclude that it's not the handling of the equipment that is the problem but being able to handle other trafficants ... ?
-
Damn trafficants think they own the road.
-
-
AKA: sprawl.
Sprawl is a word made up by urban bigots who are jealous of people who have free space.
-
Nicely obscure reference! "I, of course, knew who that was going to be before I moused over the image," he said, as he donned his sunglasses.
-
No idea who that is, but I am guessing on either the mayor of London or Donald Trump.
-
No idea who that is, but I am guessing on either the mayor of London or Donald Trump.
No, it's Jim Traficant (note the pun), a scumbag.
-
Pun noted.
Can we now get @raceprouk to climb down from there?
-
Jim Traficant (note the pun), a scumbag
He was also a politician. I'm just repeating what you said, though.
-
He was also a politician.
Right, but I was deliberately not presenting that information, because he only deserves to be remembered as a scumbag, full stop.
-
@lolwhat said:
He was also a politician.
Right, but I was deliberately not presenting that information, because he only deserves to be remembered as a scumbag, full stop.
I'm confused. There's a difference?
-
I'm confused. There's a difference?
Think of it like the Soviets whitewashing dissidents out of history.
Some politicians are harmless (like Carolyn McCarthy[1], who was both a single-issue House rep and nutty and out of tune with the political climate that her single issue never had a chance of happening) by virtue of being ineffective.
[1] I bash Carolyn McCarthy because she deserves it for willfully peddling something she should have known was at best useless and at worst absolutely unAmerican, but I will give her a tiny bit of credit for having an actual decent reason for her views, even though her statist mindset led to a horrible conclusion.
-
-
-
-
Oh @PJH, you and your coloured balls...
-
They're circles with gradient. If they were balls, the highlight would be off-centre...
-
Right, but I was deliberately not presenting that information, because he only deserves to be remembered as a scumbag, full stop.
LIES! His hair deserves to be remembered, too.
-
His hair deserves to be remembered
You mean that possum that is gathering up to leap straight up off his head?
-
If they were balls, the highlight would be off-centre.
That depends on where the light source is, and possibly the surface. It wouldn't be hard to make an anisotropic surface that would put the highlight off-center for an on-axis light source; it would probably be possible to contrive one that would put the reflection of an off-axis light source in the apparent center of the ball.
-
AKA: sprawl.
Well, the growth pattern is a bit different (sprawl being more characterised by very large developments and a transportation pattern that is very strongly reliant on automobile ownership) but they're damn similar. We'd have major sprawl problems in the UK except our zoning laws are very strong, with most urban centres required to set a band around them inside the local government area where they can't develop.
I'm not at all sure if that's a good or bad idea.
-
Probably easier to put the light source on the axis, perhaps with a suitable half-silvered mirror so that the camera can't see the light source but can see the illuminated balls…
-
Oh, absolutely. I was simply countering the statement "the highlight would be off-centre" with multiple ways the highlight could be on-center. Putting the light source on-axis is the simple, obvious way, and what I was thinking of when I wrote "[t]hat depends on where the light source is[.]"
Given that the balls are CGI, the half-silvered mirror isn't really necessary. In many rendering engines, light sources aren't visible by default; you have to attach some geometry if you want the light to look like it's coming from some visible object. Even IRL, you might be able to get the light close enough to on-axis that the highlight would look centered by just having the light next to the camera.
-
You could also put lights inside translucent balls.
-
Or you could do something with fibre optic cables. Or those special attachments for cameras that put a ring of lights (probably LEDs) around the lens, just a bit back from the front so that they don't put light directly into it. Take the picture from a distance with a decent telephoto lens and you won't be able to see the difference.
-
-
Wow, this takes me back.
I had a permit for a hella long time because I never really needed to drive anywhere.
When I finally did take my drivers test, they had me drive in an area I wasn't familiar with.
Test-type person told me to turn left at the next intersection, which had an obvious one-way sign pointing the other direction.
I honestly thought it was a trick question to make sure I wouldn't do anything stupid so I didn't turn. It turned out that it was a divided highway... but the one-way sign for the other direction was missing.
I also got lectured for pulling in the far lane when I made a right-turn ('cause everyone does that here).
Oh well, I still passed.
It's weird that I still remember that nearly 20 years later.
-
http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/b0d44028d490fa83b9b9eeb3d35b042556545a1c/c=0-8-2000-1512&r=x404&c=534x401/local/-/media/USATODAY/None/2014/09/27/1411842960000-AP-TRAFICANT-TRIAL1.jpg
Why does he have a badger on his head? Is it trying to mate with his scalp?
-
I also got lectured for pulling in the far lane when I made a right-turn ('cause everyone does that here).
FUCK ALL OF YOU!
That's a huge pet peeve of mine.
-
FUCK ALL OF YOU!
WHAT IF I'M MAKING A RIGHT-HAND TURN FROM THE LEFT-HAND RIGHT TURN LANE? DID YOU THINK OF THAT?
-
That's what the dotted line is for. It tells you "I know the rule is to stay to the inside, so here's a guideline for this intersection since it's special".
-
That's what the dotted line is for. It tells you "I know the rule is to stay to the inside, so here's a guideline for this intersection since it's special".
Yup. There's no dotted line for a right turn, though, although I think there might have used to be one--you can see where the double-ended arrow was scrubbed off of the middle lane, but it's still a two-way turn lane as you can see from the sign on the light pole.
-
Just do what the picture on the pole says: if you turn right from the middle lane, you are supposed to cross the double yellow into oncoming traffic.
-
WHAT IF I'M MAKING A RIGHT-HAND TURN FROM THE LEFT-HAND RIGHT TURN LANE? DID YOU THINK OF THAT?
OK, as long as you're not making a right turn from the left lane. People do that all the time here and it annoys me to no end.
That's what the dotted line is for. It tells you "I know the rule is to stay to the inside, so here's a guideline for this intersection since it's special".
Where do you live that people actually pay attention to that?
-
Where do you live that people actually pay attention to that?
People who aren't local find such things useful. (Locals usually just know WTF they're doing.) Maybe he's from somewhere where not everyone grew up within 5 miles…
-
People who aren't local find such things useful. (Locals usually just know WTF they're doing.) Maybe he's from somewhere where not everyone grew up within 5 miles…
But I am somewhere where not everyone grew up within 5 miles.