It's more logical if you want them to be blind. The reason it is designed that way is because of UV light..water blocks it out, air doesn't..the blood vessels are in front to block out the UV light..otherwise you would be blind in a few days.

>> ^TheGenk:
Interesting, I always thought the cells were arranged like the cephalopods since it's more logical.
Got to keep that in mind when I create my army of genetically engineered superhumans to take over the world.

Sure. Could you post a "complete and utter bullshit/reassuring psychobabble" vid?

Psh, why you and gallowflak gotta hate on my lawlz like that?

>> ^srd:

From amazing home science kids will love to fundamentalist Jesus-Loves-You spew in two comments.
Genji, could you please do your befuddled believer baiting in posts more relevant to the... ahem... discussion... you're trying to initiate?

Cool video. Knew about the blind spots, didn't know about the blood vessels casting a shadow.

Is this why I see blood vessels in my vision whenever I go to the optician and they shine a bright light in there, or is that something different?

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

@shinyblurry
So if Humans are Yahweh's greatest creation..
Why do octopuses/octopodes have perfect eyes with no blindspots.. but we don't?


So often, you're shinyblurry's enabler. And it's becoming really annoying.

Ouch, that's gotta smart. The only thing I would fault the cam-driver for is not seeing that coming. It looks like the SUV cuts across all the lanes in order to get to their exit..that's just a dick move. Double d-baggery for not putting in enough effort to turn their fat f*ck!ng head and check their blind spot.

>> ^SpaceDude:

Is it just me or does anybody else think that the driver of the car in front was being reckless by driving over that piece of metal. He almost killed someone, surely not that hard to spot lying by the side of the road. I always steer well clear of any debris in the road, it's just common sense.


Looked like a wooden stake to me. But no I don't think the guy towing the trailer was reckless for running over it for a couple reasons. He really had no where to go safely, if he went over he risked being up against that flat bed or hitting a car in his blind spot with a blind merging. And swerving while towing trailers is not a good habit to get into, if the trailer has anything big and heavy in it that could shift..you could find yourself dragging a leaning on it's way to tipping over trailer.

It'd be just like hitting a pothole, glass, or animal. Sometimes you just have to hit things, it's the safer thing to do versus swerving wildly through traffic trying to avoid it.

Now MAYBE the guy saw it coming and he could have slowed down, but it's also possible it blew into the roadway or someone else hit it and spun it further into the roadway...or it fell out of another vehicle.

Personal pet peeve of mine is people who are driving down the road and decide to suddenly swerve to miss potholes. It's not like they can't see the damn things coming down the road 20-30 feet out, but they act like it just opened up and is going to swallow their car if they don't swerve over forcing people to have to slow down or move over to avoid hitting them. Gets even more annoying when it's the same couple of cars that do this every day, almost like they hadn't had this same exact experience for the last 3 months.

@messenger

You keep saying roads are designed for automotive traffic like there's something wrong with that. Somewhere above you pointed out that cyclists pay taxes too. Your taxes also pay for sidewalks, bike trails, and forest preserves but you don't have the right to drive your car on or through any of them. If you want to ride a bike in amongst the cars, you have to accept that it's dangerous: you're harder to see, even in daylight, and your "crumple zones" are all filled with vital organs. It's a hell of a lot safer for you if you act like normal traffic.

Last week I really cared about one particular cyclist who broke a rather important traffic law. He ran a stop sign, traveling perpendicular to me, as I was entering the intersection. Fortunately, I was cruising at a pretty slow pace (maybe 25mph tops) so it wasn't a tough stop, but I did have to lock 'em up to not run the idiot over.

I don't really give a shit if cyclists ride on the shoulder (when there is one) or even the sidewalk (provided there's room amongst the pedestrians). Sure, these are technically illegal but they are good examples of, as you called it, victimless traffic laws.

One of the big problems with having bikes sharing road space with cars is you can easily fit 2-3 bikes in a car's blind spot. This is one of the big reasons bikes get sandwiched during lane changes. This is also one problem that's really not helped by typical urban bike lanes.

"This idea that car drivers don't break laws is utter fiction", and also something that I never claimed. Not sure why you're debunking the phantom argument.

I don't think any laws are going to make it safe for cyclists to be on the roads, even in designated bike lanes. No matter how perfect the system is and even if everyone adheres to it, bikes are difficult to see and even a "minor" collision with a bike is a major accident for the rider. In less urban areas, bike lanes are sometimes built some 20+ feet off the side of the road. This works well, when possible, because short of a major accident that launches a car off the road and onto the bike lane, the two never really share the same space.

Within a dense city, I don't know what the answer is. Maybe elevated bike lanes could work, sort of like how they run subway tracks in certain places.

Ok, I just paused writing for a second to do a search for "elevated bike lanes" and found some interesting concepts:

http://www.thepurehands.org/cycleways/
http://kolelinia.com/kolelinia/

Somewhere I saw someone mention that a lot of older cities also have abandoned subway tunnels that could be repurposed. I understand that underground isn't the nicest place for a bike ride on a warm spring day, but it's a pretty sweet idea if you're just looking to commute. Even if you just reused sections of tunnel in spots where there was no room overhead, it's valuable to keep in mind.

I really think separating the bikes from the cars is the way to go. Like I said before, even in the best circumstances there will be accidents and bike vs car is never really going to turn out well for the biker.

It's also a great idea not to ride in people's blind spots if you can avoid it....

Neat video, though I would have liked it even more if they had pointed out that the eyes of some cephalapods are better than human eyes in some respects. They lack the blind spot that vertebrates have and they can distinguish the orientation of polarized light (something humans need to wear polarized glasses to do).

Someone knows their firearms.
If I may offer and WADR, the Krummlauf option was offered for the MG42 and the STG44 with the "I"(as was correctly stated by radx) used by the infantry and a "P"(Panzer) variant for tanks. Barrels were issued in 30, 45, 60, and 90 degree curves. The 30 was quite accurate, under 1.5 MOA, and all practically accurate. Barrel life was limited, as already stated, with the 30 degree barrels rated roughly at 300 rds and the 45 degree at approximately 160 rds. I have seen one fired and a couple on film. Truly an influential design. Kalashnikov borrowed the gas system for the AK for instance.
>> ^radx:

[Geek]You know where the need for this modification supposedly arose?
Tanks designed without means for CQC/infantry suppression, particularly the Elephant, a heavy tank destroyer based on spare parts of the Porsche Tiger after Henschel's design was chosen. Great armor, immense firepower, piss-poor mobility - and no MG. So they developed the "Maschinenpistolen-Vorsatz P": a weapon system to be fitted on the StG44 which allowed the crew to cover blind spots from within the tank. It consists of a barrel bent 90 degrees, a periscope, an adapter and a hull mounting.
"Vorsatz I" (or J, can't remember) used a barrel bent at 30 degrees and was supposed to be used from within open-topped APCs as well as in urban combat, though it took about a minute to put it onto your rifle and the barrel was useless after 150-300 rounds. I imagine the 45 degree version was to be used in the same manner.
Rheinmetall still have some in their collection.[/geek]

[Geek]You know where the need for this modification supposedly arose?

Tanks designed without means for CQC/infantry suppression, particularly the Elephant, a heavy tank destroyer based on spare parts of the Porsche Tiger after Henschel's design was chosen. Great armor, immense firepower, piss-poor mobility - and no MG. So they developed the "Maschinenpistolen-Vorsatz P": a weapon system to be fitted on the StG44 which allowed the crew to cover blind spots from within the tank. It consists of a barrel bent 90 degrees, a periscope, an adapter and a hull mounting.

"Vorsatz I" (or J, can't remember) used a barrel bent at 30 degrees and was supposed to be used from within open-topped APCs as well as in urban combat, though it took about a minute to put it onto your rifle and the barrel was useless after 150-300 rounds. I imagine the 45 degree version was to be used in the same manner.

Rheinmetall still have some in their collection.[/geek]

Sorry, Louis. Honking is often legitimate. For instance, when the person just ahead of you in the next lane decides to change into your lane and obviously doesn't know you are there. Maybe you're in their blind spot, maybe they didn't check their mirrors, maybe they're on their cell and oblivious to the world. The point is that the honk lets them know you are there and saves you from dangerously swerving or slamming on the brakes.

But i probably most frequently use the horn to honk at stupid animals that are gonna get hit. Neighborhood dogs and cats. Idiotic deer. Or other would-be roadkill...

As a Rider, to me this is a great vid because it illustrates that you can be as prepared as you want but the dangers still exist.

Drivers don't see motorcycles - It's a fact!
A cyclist can take all the precautions in the world but they are still sitting ducks out there.

When I ride - I hold by one simple rule.
All other vehicles are trying to hit you - don't give them that chance.
This means: NEVER ride in a blind spot
Always assume that car at the intersection is going to pull out in front of you.
Peripheral vision is reduced in a helmet, take the time to look properly.
Always Ride with traffic, cars are not pylons to weave through.
Hold your lane - ride on the inside (not the shoulder side) of the road.
Avoid tunnel vision, like in a car, always watch everything - you need ten times the alertness on a bike!

And yes, we all know it was fake - no one claimed it wasn't - Funny? maybe not, but it still makes a point.
As a non-German speaker, maybe this is one time where language barrier enhances the video, we don't get caught up on unimportant things like diction and just see the message!

I drive a truck similar to this for a living and have known lots of drivers involved in accidents such as this. they almost always get the shaft legally. I would put money on the fact that this driver is going to end up paying a fine or losing his CDL based on the "official" word that he "over corrected" it is CLEAR from the footage that he didn't even have time to react at all, much less over correct.
that car was in or very nearly in his blind spot and very clearly forced him violently and instantly into the median divider. there was nothing that driver could do but ride it out and pray.
The idiot in the 4-wheeler will get a point on his license or some such bullshit and also stands a great chance of getting a juicy settlement out of the company that contracts the truck...if not Pepsi co themselves.
The truck driver is ALWAYS at fault by default in the cases...very rare for a truck driver to be exonerated even with indisputable footage proving his innocence such as in this case. I could rant for hours about the inequalities that exist for myself and my fellow drivers, but I digress.

I concur. Pretty much all I do at stoplights is stare in my mirrors. It'd be great for that since my mirrors are pointed toward my blind spots. It'd be great to keep eyes ahead. What's the top brain bucket certifier now? Used to be Snell I think.

In reply to this comment by calvados:
J'approuve. It's not vital IMO (one, side mirrors; two, I'm usually not focused on what's happening behind me, unless I've just had to make a fast stop) but definitely nice to have. I'd shell out $50 or $100 more to have that feature in my next helmet. You?

In reply to this comment by schmawy:
What do you think of this?