February 2023

S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728    

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Wednesday, July 12th, 2006 02:06 pm
I almost got creamed a few minutes ago by a guy in a white truck running a red light. (According to one of my friendsfriends I am more at fault than someone who runs red lights, because he hates women who put on makeup in cars. (Note that I was not, nor have I ever, put on makeup while driving a car.) But that's neither here nor there.) Because the timing was just right, or because when he leaned on the horn he ALSO hit the brakes, or whatever, he didn't actually hit me. It was very close and then he was gone, zooming off to make a left onto Central.

Bad luck to encounter him at all, or good luck to be spared a new car purchase and probable injury?

Sorta like the time I inhaled a bee but didn't get stung.

I'm still a little shaky.
Wednesday, July 12th, 2006 09:32 pm (UTC)
Hugs. I hate that -- I hate that shaky feeling, the whole thing.

I'm glad he didn't hit you.
Wednesday, July 12th, 2006 09:34 pm (UTC)
Me too. How confident are you that if it went to court he'd fess up to running the light? ...me neither.
Wednesday, July 12th, 2006 09:46 pm (UTC)
Hmmmm. Some bus companies are employing video cameras that turn on whenever a sensor detects unusual acceleration or impact, primarily to be able to identify whether their driver did anything wrong in an accident or near-miss.

It didn't occur to me when I first read about it, but I bet it won't be long before this technology is used in private cars, pointing outwards, so one can avoid he-said-she-said in these kind of circumstances.
Wednesday, July 12th, 2006 09:50 pm (UTC)
A camera that's always on and has the last, say, sixty seconds of video - and then will store it on impact - that'd be superb. Insurance companies might choose to offer a discount for it the way they (used to?) offer a discount for a third brake light or LoJack.
Thursday, July 13th, 2006 02:15 am (UTC)
product exists (uses an MMC card for the video, as I recall.) Still a couple hundred dollars and only points in one direction, but the price will come down (probably not enough to get real insurance discounts, the lojack thing was legislative hacking, not rationality :-)
Thursday, July 13th, 2006 02:35 am (UTC)
Do you mean that the price affects whether insurers offer a discount to insure cars equipped with it?

I find it believable that there was legislative hacking involved in that case. (Less believable if it were for the third brake light.) But man, if I were an insurer I'd prefer cars equipped with this video. None of this "nobody was at fault" crap. Show me which of my drivers are good.
Saturday, July 29th, 2006 02:52 am (UTC)
http://www.jalopnik.com/cars/gadgets/tru-dat-truscene-tells-it-like-it-is-190348.php
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/gadgets/truscene-car-monitoring-device-190269.php
for a $1000 unit that's being marketed now, but I'm sure I've seen cheaper ones.