h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

To hope to be that active, if I even got close to his age...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-28869235

And yes I remember seeing him do it before on TV in 1966...

Another silly sat-nav error: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28910662

I do wonder if flying cars could be a reality, but are being held back because of the problems we'd have with 3D SatNav errors.

Flying car bodies of a size with automobiles and with similar dimensions, have been developed.

Fears that people may use them to leapfrog over other traffic on the highways may be among the reasons they are being held back.

It's hard to imagine that the orbits couldn't be corrected; all orbiting things must be liable to wander off course, this must surely be factored in to the design.

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20120719-awoken-from-a-2d-world

Fascinating story of the wonder of the human brain

GB

Interesting article. I may lose my stereo vision permanently some day. I know I can cope without it, but I don't want to have to.

WHO - What? Why?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-28937610

"The World Health Organization is calling for a range of tough regulations restricting the use of e-cigarettes.

In a report the health body recommends banning their indoor use and says sales to children should stop.

The WHO urges manufacturers not to make claims the devices can help people quit smoking - until there is firm evidence to support this."

Yet here we have this story on the BBC (same graphic too) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-27485954


"Smokers who use e-cigarettes to quit are more likely to succeed than those who use willpower alone or buy nicotine replacement therapies, such as patches or gum, a study suggests.

The survey of nearly 6,000 smokers found a fifth had quit with the aid of e-cigarettes.

That was 60% higher than those who did not use the devices, the study said."


I'm an ex-smoker and I'm genuinely bemused by the response to e-cigs by various official bodies.

children can buy e-cigarettes? wow... I did not think that

Well, that's mostly just due to legislative lag. Statutes are being enacted banning the sale to minors.

London cyclists 'collide with 25% of guide dogs' working in the capital

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-28945834


First up, cyclist shouldn't be on the pavements.

Now, let's look at the actual figures used here...


"A survey involving a fifth of guide dog owners in the city"
They only surveyed a fifth of the guide dog owners, okay, a fifth is a larger number than most surveys. So maybe that's okay.

"70% had experienced a near miss with cyclists on pavements or jumping red lights"
On pavements, or jumping red lights? Two completely separate things? What percentage were on pavements, what percentage were jumping red lights?

"just over 320 using guide dogs in the city"
Hang on, there's only 320 registered guide dogs in the city? So, this survey is from 25% of 320? So they surveyed 64 people? And from those 64 people there were 16 cases of cyclists colliding with guide dogs?

Just 16?

And it doesn't even tell you over what period of time this was! Was it this year? Was it the last ten years? Was it over as far as anyone can remember?

There is *no* story here.

Well, there's two stories: the one in the headline and the one in the text.

The headline mentions collisions. The text mentions one collision and a lot of near-misses.

Cycling successfully consists of a constant stream of near misses.

The annoying thing, for me, with this story is that Guide Dogs are starting a campaign to make sure that partially sighted and blind people are comfortable out on the streets. But rather than running with that, the BBC decided to attack cyclists. Why? There's no real story there.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-28948946

I'm astounded that people aren't taught to shoot with fake ammo, never mind giving a child a loaded weapon.

GB

Saw a WREN do something similar in the navy - nobody was hurt though.

A commonplace in my own sub-culture, kids are generally taught to shoot beginning at the age of five, usually with a low powered single shot rifle, a .22 for example.

Boys and girls are both expected to learn, and the lesson usually begins with a demonstration of how much damage a shot can do, say to a gallon tin of water, or something like that.

The reason a low calibre weapon is usually employed is that learning to deal with recoil takes practice and experience.

First time I fired a pistol, as it happened, a .32 revolver loaded with a single shot, even though I was already skilled with the .22, I found the recoil painful, nearly sprained my thumb and never forgot afterward how important it was to keep a proper grip on the weapon constantly, ditto as I learned to use higher powered rifles.

An UZI has high recoil, a high rate of fire, is easy to lose control of, the recoil can jerk the weapon almost free of a loose grip, tangling the trigger finger in the trigger guard, resulting in uncontrolled and undirected firing, and is definitely not a weapon that should be put in the hands of a novice.




My own early experience with firearms was on the family farm.

My outlook on weapons is to the effect that they're tools, nothing more, nothing less.

I don't keep any firearms these days, except the old .22 I learned on and a replica wild west .45 revolver, both of which are kept disassembled and neither of which can be put into action without parts not stored in the house, no ammo kept at the house either.

>>An UZI has high recoil, a high rate of fire, is easy to lose control of, the recoil can jerk the weapon almost free of a loose grip, tangling the trigger finger in the trigger guard, resulting in uncontrolled and undirected firing, and is definitely not a weapon that should be put in the hands of a novice.<<

THIS!

Putting an Uzi, especially one that is still configured for full auto, in the hands of a nine year old whisp of a girl is an astoundingly stupid thing to do.

This was in Arizona. Arizona shares with Texas and several other states a current fervor for gun rights absolutism. In Texas this is being demonstrated by a group calling itself Open Carry Texas who insist it's their Bog given right to not only own assault style weapons, but to carry them around in public anywhere they damn well please. This includes a predominately black neighborhood in Houston where they have been explicitly asked to stay out of or they will be matched "gun for gun". (So far they've postponed this demonstration citing a lack of a parade permit.)

This current wave of fervor seems to be the result of our polarized politics. With Obama in the Whitehouse, their normal level of paranoia regarding jack booted thugs kicking in their doors, taking away their arms and the 2nd amendment with them, and instilling some UN based New World Order has reached a crescendo. This is fed by Fox News, Conservative talk radio and a virulent propaganda campaign through email and social media of the most blatant lies and fearmongering.

Gone are the days when the NRA supported RESPONSIBLE gun ownership and reasonable background checks. Now it's guns for literally everyone, everywhere!

<>

At that range blanks can still kill

I wouldn't know. My lifelong avoidance of all things gun-related is working well so far. It helps that I live in the UK, of course!