In that video, Milo helpfully defines pedophilia, AND YOU STILL GOT IT WRONG. Stop lying, please.

Now to what he was actually talking about: criminal law has to have a stark, black and white line to define an age of consent. I don't see what's wrong with arguing that line is imperfect and some younger people are capable of giving it. I wouldn't go so far as saying that would justify breaking the law. But morally, there is no difference between screwing a minor a day before they turn 18 and the day after. In reality it might very well be completely legal in the next state over.

He is an idiot for even touching this third-rail topic and his jokes about the Father are tone-deaf but maybe that has to do with his British upbringing.

First, about the leaving room part. In most car racing, you don't have to 'leave room', as long as you don't touch. Cutting off another driver's line is part of racing, you don't just LET other cars pass you, normally. Turning into a car's rear axle, that's NEVER OK in racing (except demolition racing).

Secondly, and more to the point, there WAS room. Not much, but definitely enough. If you look really close, at 21-22 seconds is when the contact happens, and the yellow car is at least 1 foot away from the white line, and no where near the 'run out' (red and white striped 'curb') for the corner. He intentionally turns into the rear of the white car, hitting it instead of just keeping it straight and coming in behind. I don't think he even would have used the run out had he just kept it straight, and certainly wouldn't have been off the track. His other option would be to let off the gas, then move right once the car in front is clear, but then he'd be in second. I think he expected the white car to crash, but not take him with it. He certainly should have known what would happen when he turned into the other car at that speed coming out of a turn, and that it would be terrible.

The car behind has the greater duty to avoid an accident on the track. At least, that's how it was when I did off road racing.

Side note...at :46, I'm pretty sure some poo came out of the guy with the blue flag.

I still feel very comfortable thinking of him as a moron and anyone else who traverses said white line.

2 more comments have been lost in the ether at this killed duplicate.

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by PlayhousePals.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Riding-the-White-Line

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by kulpims. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

Kind of.
Real cattle guards require a pit below them so the animals can see their legs will fall through. This doesn't have that. Cows can be fooled with just white lines across the road. Some animals see better, so some animals would never try to cross the lines, but some would. Having the fence there discourages them from trying, since it's just more fence why bother (said the sheep). Maybe this field is used by differing animals that need different barriers, and this gate fits all the bills?

Traffic accidents would be virtually eliminated. The insurance industry probably has the most to lose when it comes to self driving cars, without a risk to insure against they can't make any money.

Regarding features like this, I've just got a new Golf with adaptive cruise control. This measures the distance between you and the car in front and maintains a pre set gap up to a set speed. They have a lane assist option too, like the video here but I don't have that and I'm really glad. The cruise control is teaching me to not react when a car slows down in front of me or pulls into the lane in front of me because the car is doing it for me.

I've noticed I'm letting my eyes wander for longer when looking at the radio, or flicking through options on the display. It's not intentional, taking my eyes off the road is dangerous. I know that. But I can steer between white lines using my peripheral vision so as long as nothing really bad happens the car will save me, so the temptation to look at something just a little longer creeps in subliminally. I don't want to be doing it, and I try not to. Thing is, if you're driving a long way it's pretty certain you're not going to have the self control to be 100% focussed on the road every millisecond.

I can't wait for driverless cars. I can't help but think that features like this being drip fed us are not really that helpful. It's just teaching us to pay less attention when actually the cars aren't that clever yet.

And to anyone who's going to say 'if you take your eyes off the road you're a bad driver, you should be able to keep concentrating, blah blah blah', you don't understand how the mind works. Your body adapts to the situation you're in. When I drive an auto I don't go for the clutch all the time, my body adjusts. It's not a conscious thing, it's automatic. it's the same with these driver aids, your body learns to take advantage of them.

So as a point of pedantry....he could have totally made that corner if he had stayed off the brakes kept a steady throttle and leaned harder to the left (he was on course to make the corner if the car hadn't startled him). Braking is almost never the right thing to when in or leaving a corner, it just stands the bike up and sends you wide.

Target fixation is a bitch!

However, solid white lines mean no overtaking/crossing to the opposite lane for good reason (the entire manoeuvre was technically illegal here in the UK because of said solid lines). It was foolish to even attempt what he did there and doubly so if you haven't mastered proper corner control/reactions to be able to deal with the unexpected effectively (which he clearly had not as evidenced by the vid).

All of that said, we all make mistakes. This chap might normally be a better rider than he appears here and simply made a poor judgement call entering that corner which resulted in him panicking and having to bail. (He may also have been a retard with too much power and a death-wish. Those guys are definitely around)


Also Re: @Darkhand and @bcglorf

Bikes very rarely kill car drivers. It's generally only a side on collision with a door that can do that and even then only at serious speed. Bikes rarely weigh over 250kg and most sports bikes are sub 200kg. They simply don't carry anything like the kind of energy a car would even at 100mph+.

I'm not saying it's impossible but it would be very unlikely here. He however could have easily broken his neck if he'd hit the car head on. My brother had a head on with a car about a year ago at 60-70ish (combined) and fractured his (fortunately made a complete recovery since).

Bikers are almost always a far bigger danger to themselves than anyone else. This was reckless but mostly for himself.

I suspect however that lessons were at least learned!

Apparently you, sir, have never tried to explain to anyone who is French, that they are wrong. I believe that too is another word they choose to ignore in the French language. (the word, wrong)

My Mother in Law was French and being correct was the only option - ever. Which led to my wife explaining to me that "I" needed to be the one to let it go. Something that is very hard when you know the facts and they do not.

Things like "No it's okay to cross the white line and drive on the shoulder of the road, that's why they pave it. (the line is just a guide) It's up to pedestrians to to stay clear of the shoulder and never walk on it because that's just for cars!"
(That's a little one) Now, telling me it's daytime when it's clearly night time was an argument I'd rather not relive

PS: I know you were being sarcastic and facicious and all that. But I'm not -It's still a sore spot with me

Looks like both are at fault here. The SUV didn't stop, and the plane is coming in way too low. Look at this satellite image of the airport, those yellow arrows pointing to the white line indicates a displaced threshold. Planes can takeoff from the displaced threshold, but they are not supposed to land on it.

"Exploring the tension between Surface and Volume.
One gives birth to the other as white lines rise from
black space and give shape to invisible structures that
are driven by sound."

LOL FUCK OFF WITH THE BULLSHIT I MEAN JUSES CHRIST HOW CAN SOMEONE WRITE THAT AND NOT FEEL LIKE A PRICK ?


Nice video though "Inspired by the dazzle paintings of Edward Wadsworth" is a totally legitimate and usfull thing to say and would have done fine in explaining , giving extra information about the video. I like demo scene and animated music visuals just a shame this guy was happy to talk utter shit.

Okay... I haven't finished the video, but I'll give you a play by play anyway. It's not my field (I study sensory systems) so if there are any clinicians in the audience, please forgive my ignorance.

First plot: The effect she's talking about is an extrapolation from a linear model with presumably assumed uniform variance along the independent axis. If you look at the actual underlying data, presumably notated with open and filled bubbles (no mention of what size means, but probably number of samples) you see that there is a lot of "effect" extrapolated from the model despite very little obvious trend in that part of the data. In fact, there are only two or three open bubbles at all on that part of the chart presumably because it was viewed as unethical to treat severely depressed patients with placebos. Further, there is a huge (relatively speaking) variability in the efficacy among severely depressed patients treated with the drugs. This is a symptom of one of the root problems which is that clinical modeling is typically very weak. The models are often simplified not because it is appropriate or useful, but rather because it is the way that particular researcher knows how to model data.

The a priori linkage between score on some survey and a response to some chemical is, IMO, tenuous at best. Given an argument from correlation that seems to lean heavily on a magic data point or two does little to change it. To give you a sense of how tenuous this data is, consider instead fitting the lines through only the data where the effect is considered "large." As an experiment, pull up the chart, and do a "chi by eye" fit of a line through the white dots, and a line through the dark dots, but only those dots to the right of the "severe depression" threshold line. Notice that the white line would then have a much steeper slope (stronger correlation) and the dark line would have almost no correlation (that data looks pretty isotropic to me).

Alright... that's enough for one comment. Next plot please...

Ticket to ride the white line highway.