That was pretty cool. I wonder if the Tesla's sensors could still "see" the braking SUV as it is a bigger vehicle than the red car that rear ended it. We can't see the sides of the SUV in the video, until the red car begins its lane change, because of the wide-angle dashcam but perhaps the Tesla's sensors could.

I think the driver of the red car, who wanted to change lanes, was fixated on the black car in the right hand lane and didn't see the SUV suddenly brake. If the red car had collision avoidance capabilities, this accident would likely have been prevented.

The only way I could see it working as described is if the Tesla really has that good of object-detection onboard, was already tracking all objects, and was just that accurate in determining the speed of the impacted SUV and the rate of decreasing distance between it and the car that hit it.
Even if that were the case, I suspect the sensors on these cars get exponentially fidgety at longer distances and with more extreme angles (like measuring changing distance between two 'overlapping' objects directly ahead), it's really unlikely it was predicting the collision.
All that to say: Yeah, I agree. You're most probably right.

Here is the problem, Mr. Schlosser is a journalist, not a Nuclear Scientist. He does not understand, or has chosen to ignore for propaganda reasons, that an unarmed warhead is EXTREMELY unlikely to perform the exact sequence of events that need to take place to have a nuclear reaction happen.

Yes, he is fully correct in that we have had numerous 'butt-clenching' moments in which we could have started WW3 due to a malfunction or human error. But in the other cases he mentions, such as the bombs that landed on Spain, the lightning bolt on the tower, and the wrench on the rocket, the chance of the warhead going up while being unarmed is infinitesimal. They simply don't go 'boom' because of a collision or explosion. Now you could have a 'dirty bomb' type incident where the radioactive materials could be spread and come into contact with humans, but that is about it.

The cases that have been officially listed as Broken Arrows were because they involved an active bomb, like the one in Florida. Everything else he mentions in this video is his 'belief' and is conjecture.

Now, before I get unloaded on, I wish we didn't have nuclear weapons. I don't agree with Trump that we should renew the arms race, I think he is nuts since we have more than enough weapons to blanket the cities of the world more than a couple of times. If you add all the nukes from the Big 3 (USA/Russia/France...yes, France) there are enough to cover every single inch of the world.

The problem is, who bells the cat? If we give up all of our weapons, we are at risk. I wish we weren't, but we would be. If we bring down our numbers gradually, there are still other countries that may not, like North Korea. How do we trust the other country is actually following through? In a perfect world, we would all lay down our weapons and sing kumbaya, but as Heinlein wrote: "...Anyone who clings to the historically untrue and thoroughly immoral doctrine that violence never settles anything I would advise to conjure up the ghosts of Napoleon Bonaparte and the Duke of Wellington and let them debate it. The ghost of Hitler could referee and the jury might well be the Dodo, the Great Auk, and the Passenger Pigeon. Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and their freedoms."

PS...Yes, I know Starship Troopers is a controversial novel with overtones of Militarism and Fascism. However, there are quotes that ring true no matter what 'ism' people attach to the overall story. If you doubt that, look at the utter disbelief and depression that overcame liberals when Trump won. "He simply was supposed to, it was impossible, not like this, we have no hope, etc" were the feelings of the people who gave him no hope of winning. I, having lived and read enough to get a fair picture of how fucked up we are as a species, had little doubt he could pull it off. We elected a former Wrestler as governor, a former actor as governor, and a former actor as President. We overlook mass genocide in other countries. We ignore climate change. We spend hundreds of billions on defense and less than 10 on space exploration, all the while living on a planet that is already critically overpopulated (and is growing almost exponentially).

Yah, hard to know the particulars---and the wind and current probably would have worked against this idea---but---I did have a sailing instructor who stress tested me in a narrow channel by proposing that I'd just lost the engine---now what would I do?

The correct answers? Well, it's a sailboat, dummy---you could sail. And if all else fails---drop anchor (as long as you had the swing room; and even if you didn't, the resulting collision would be less impressive.)

But---we don't really know how the captain and pilot got into this situation.

I look forward to learning more.

Yeaaahh, I'm with you on this. As much as I love to hate on Star Citizen, I really can't see how creating a ship of this scale in such high fidelity in a multiplayer game with collision and physics and dynamic lightning etc etc is even close anything anybody has done before. I mean, I am just a lay person, but to me it would seem to be a pretty extraordinary technical feat. Consequently I have doubts they'll be able to do it at all.

Surely having it fall over in a collision would be safer than remaining completely rigid?

Love me some sand dunes. I've heard low droning sounds while out in Guadalupe sand dunes in central california and in Death Valley. I remember researching why and there were some theories - something about grain size (changes pitch), friction & amplification from a layer of moisture below the surface and sand collision upon the surface creating vibrations that in turn create a feedback loop of low frequency. Stony stuff, lol!

The short answer is "It depends!"

I know it's a crappy answer, but there are way too many parameters at play. There are many games today that have scripted scenes in them that are pretty cinematic. Think of GTA III, from 2001. The cut scenes in that game still outshine the actual gameplay of GTA V today.

If the scene is scripted, then all the animation, and camera movement can be fine tuned and all compute resources are pooled into the viewport of the camera. This allows the artists to focus all of the trickery on the shot itself, but not the rest of the world. From a PVS or scene-graph stand point, you have pretty much reduced the complexity to just what you are seeing.

I do not know how they made this demo and cannot comment on it with any authoritative capital. I've written 3D engines before (not for videogames though) and can comment on the technology I think I'm seeing here. My comments are just an opinion based on what I know. I do not have access to Unity and have never used it before. But here it goes:

For a scene like this, there should be reduced/canned computation in:

• Collision detection and response
  
• AI
  
• Animation / IK
  
• PVS
  
• Texture Atlasing
  

The shaders, unless they are geometry (the ripping of the skin/flesh in the Adam scene) could or could not be reduced in scope and complexity. I am not sure if they are scripted or dynamic. By scripted, I mean a geometry shader that reads vertex data from a VBO stream or some memory buffer instead of computing the vertices on the fly. It's still real-time, just not dynamic.

Most of the graphics you see here are standard applications of technology that's been around for a while:

• PBR shader
  
• Motion Blur Shader
  
• Depth of Field Shader
  
• Cascaded Shadow Maps Shader
  

The particle system seems pretty standard as well.

This is a great demo and I am extremely impressed with the art direction, but the engine itself is, after all, Unity with PBR for the characters, and maybe Global Illumation for the indoor scenes, which I believe they licensed from Geomerics.

Your video, Baby Reacts to Skate Park Collision, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 102 Badge!

Oh god... this is what it will sound like when cars start doing ads to sell themselves.

"Downtown Chicago at rush hour was always bad, but nowadays it's worse than ever... however, with my enhanced 3.5-liter DOHC 24-valve V6, rated at 300 horsepower, I am extraordinarily equipped to handle whatever is thrown at me. Of course, if things go sideways, I'm more than ready to get right in there - I can activate my predictive forward collision warning and forward emergency braking for a stealth approach, or trust in my shadowy master to take action with my driver attention alert... or maybe I should make a statement, and test the limits of my extruded aluminum roof crossmember and additional frame crossmember. If some jumped up elitist pedestrians want to get in the way, I'm more than willing to go all in, as I roll through like a... well, like a car. The only certainty, is that my driver will get to Baby Parkour to pick up Karen at exactly 4.30."

Thank goodness for this video's explanation. I kept wondering how they detected the gravitational waves and no stories explained it. The animation here was great.

Now I just wonder how they know so certainly that it was *that* 1-billion-year-old black hole collision that they detected.

Great stuff. *promote

working as intended.

Good thing you don't have collision with yourself.

*backup=[...snipped...] from http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/40420/new-trailer-ice-age-collision-course

Can I take this commercial to imply that the warranty will cover any damage resulting from collisions with other construction equipment, collisions with buildings, rollovers, scraping the drivetrain over concrete highway dividers and general exploding?

Clearly they're implying the truck can survive this, so that's a pretty good warranty right there.

I feel exactly the same way as you, including the angry way you present it as though you've just been nearly killed by someone on a mobile phone.

These people clearly have a cartoon-like understanding of how a thousand lbs of metal and accelerant behave in a collision. As though you get out of the wreck with a few stars whizzing round your head and you shake your head and feel great again. Stuff like that can cost lives - and if you say that to the guilty party they'll laugh at you as though it's impossible, as though no one has ever negligently killed someone in a car crash. It can cause life-changing medical complications, take away people's livelihoods.

I'm also a defensive driver, and i've still been in many near misses. What i don't understand is why aren't all these reckless distracted drivers in more accidents? Do they have some sort of idiot's immunity?