3 ms·

It’s off topic but I don’t believe most people are functional in society. I think they are hiding their shitty behavior to themselves and to others, and their t

It’s off topic but I don’t believe most people are functional in society. I think they are hiding their shitty behavior to themselves and to others, and their true self comes out once in a while. They hide it mostly to their family, but other human beings are treated like NPCs. For example I live in the south of France and people are literally crazy on the road but they still avoid accidents by some kind of miracle. These are people from all sex, color, and age. The good middle-aged white father becomes a fucking moron when his car is turned on. The young new mom who pretends to love her children is speeding on the road like an idiot. Society accepts that or turns its head the other way not to look at it, but it’s definitely around us and I see it every time I go to work.

toast0 2y ago
> The young new mom who pretends to love her children is speeding on the road like an idiot. If everyone is crazy on the road, it's best to reduce the exposure to the road. Speeding decreases time spent on the road. Speeding on the road is genius, not stupid.
- wizzwizz4 2y ago
  Well, no, because speeding increases the energy of potential collisions, and also encourages others to speed. If you have to drive more than once, "speeding" isn't necessarily a dominant strategy.
  - card_zero 2y ago
    Would that change if cars could go fast enough, say mach 3?
    - wizzwizz4 2y ago
      When driving, you want to keep your velocity relative to other cars as low as possible, while retaining your ability to avoid obstacles / not murder cyclists and pedestrians. If cars could go at mach 3, then you'd want to avoid roads entirely: it's not feasible to avoid obstacles at that speed, and you certainly don't want to get hit by shockwaves or – worse – actual cars travelling at such relative velocities. So no, you would have worse problems in this hypothetical.
      - card_zero 2y ago
        Yes, or relativistic velocities. I figured that harm due to the energy of the collision is limited by death, while time spent on road tends to zero, but your mention of shockwaves brings to mind that a sufficiently high-energy collision would also be a danger to otherwise uninvolved road users, or residents of nearby towns, so my first assumption was incorrect. (I leave aside the problem of maintaining control of a mach 3 road vehicle as an implementation detail.)
cgh 2y ago
Some years back, I was driving to the town of Apt, in a hilly area of Provence. I was on a secondary road and going roughly the speed limit, maybe a little more. I was passed on a curvy section of road like I was standing still by a woman who was simultaneously smoking, talking on her phone and examining her face in the mirror. It was an amazing display of needless risk and even though I was alone, I started laughing.

toast0 2y ago

> The young new mom who pretends to love her children is speeding on the road like an idiot. If everyone is crazy on the road, it's best to reduce the exposure to the road. Speeding decreases time spent on the road. Speeding on the road is genius, not stupid.

wizzwizz4 2y ago
Well, no, because speeding increases the energy of potential collisions, and also encourages others to speed. If you have to drive more than once, "speeding" isn't necessarily a dominant strategy.
- card_zero 2y ago
  Would that change if cars could go fast enough, say mach 3?
  - wizzwizz4 2y ago
    When driving, you want to keep your velocity relative to other cars as low as possible, while retaining your ability to avoid obstacles / not murder cyclists and pedestrians. If cars could go at mach 3, then you'd want to avoid roads entirely: it's not feasible to avoid obstacles at that speed, and you certainly don't want to get hit by shockwaves or – worse – actual cars travelling at such relative velocities. So no, you would have worse problems in this hypothetical.
    - card_zero 2y ago
      Yes, or relativistic velocities. I figured that harm due to the energy of the collision is limited by death, while time spent on road tends to zero, but your mention of shockwaves brings to mind that a sufficiently high-energy collision would also be a danger to otherwise uninvolved road users, or residents of nearby towns, so my first assumption was incorrect. (I leave aside the problem of maintaining control of a mach 3 road vehicle as an implementation detail.)

cgh 2y ago

Some years back, I was driving to the town of Apt, in a hilly area of Provence. I was on a secondary road and going roughly the speed limit, maybe a little more. I was passed on a curvy section of road like I was standing still by a woman who was simultaneously smoking, talking on her phone and examining her face in the mirror. It was an amazing display of needless risk and even though I was alone, I started laughing.