main@TechTalk.groups.io

Home Messages Hashtags Subgroups Wiki

Between

and

Re: Gun Technique, Hunting and Technology James Bentley #26981 What's insane is that the general public can purchase a version of this sniper rifle that hits a very small target at over half a mile. Yikes, I think I will just stay in the house with the blinds drrawn. toggle quoted messageShow quoted text -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 11:17 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Gun Technique, Hunting and Technology Wow! that is freakin insane! JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of James Bentley Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 9:07 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Gun Technique, Hunting and Technology The United States military has a computerized rifle and scope combination. It first takes a photo of the entire target area. Next, the shooter uses a cursor on a touch screen to tell the computer where to put the bullet. Next, the shooter aims at the target. The computer fires the rifle only when it sees that the rifle is aimed with pin point accuracy. 3 inch Targets can be hit accurately at distances over two miles. -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:56 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Gun Technique, Hunting and Technology Finally, a relevant informative post. Thank you for contributing to my small pool of knowledge. :) And while on the subject matter, I'm thinking an audio beep of some sort might be able to alert the blind shooter than the object of interest is within the cross hairs of scope. Key will be determining what is target object and what is some sort of artifact. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Joe Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 8:47 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: [TechTalk] Gun Technique, Hunting and Technology There is now what some are calling a smart rifle, out of Texas. At $25,000, it's beyond the reach of most enthusiasts, but it can fetch that price for the level of precision it can automatically adjust to help the shooter acquire a target. If technology has leaped that far, one can almost wonder what credit, if any, the shooter gets, but my question is this: What technology have the hunters among us used to rely a little less on sighted assistance? I go deer hunting, but thus far I have leaned heavily on discrete cues from sighted companions to know where and when to fire. It's not a bad method. I've brought down three bucks in this fashion, and while hunting can often be enjoyed with companions, it would be nice to independently, but responsibly, engage and execute the target myself. Right now I use a laser to help my sighted companions get a better sense of where I am aiming. This allows me to hold and operate the rifle on my own, but again, it feels inefficient. Any tips would be welcomed. I'll note that while I am a member of a local shooting range, I have hesitated to obtain a gun permit. I understand my shooting would be optimal at very close range, but the risk of hitting someone innocent, however small, still weighs on my conscience. I realize for some the discussion of guns and hunting could be abhorrent. If so, feel free to email me off list. For whatever it's worth, I eat what I kill. I've never gone hunting for the mere sport. I've learned how to skin my own kill, and I suppose one could argue the knife skill in doing so could itself be viewed as a form of technology skill. Not to stray too far off topic here, but any number of disasters could occur in our lifetime and in our own backyard. In a scenario with no power and extensive food shortage, that Windows machine isn't going to be worth a whole lot except for maybe scrap metal. Our definition of "technology" just might revert to what technology used to be. That is, the means to survive. Best, Joe -- Musings of a Work in Progress: www.JoeOrozco.com/ Twitter: @ScribblingJoe
More All Messages By This Member
Re: How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll Joseph Lee <joseph.lee22590@...> #26980 Hi Carlos, Usually when I posta poll, I prepare myself to receive votes from polls and emails (as a direct email or as a reply). As for my vote: : I chose option 3 in the poll. I tend to use it if there are new Insider builds that include features or fixes for it. As for Edge: will give you a backstage tour upon request. Cheers, Joseph toggle quoted messageShow quoted text From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 2, 2016 7:22 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll Sigh I give up. LOL everyone can just post their vote in a reply if it is more convenient. ----- Original Message ----- From: Loy To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:17 AM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll It takes me to the Tech Talk group main page, no options to vote. ----- Original Message ----- From: Carlos To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Saturday, July 2, 2016 10:02 AM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll Interesting. There should be several radio buttons which are the choices and a "Vote" link. ----- Original Message ----- From: Loy To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:00 AM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll I clicked on vote now but did not see any option to vote. ----- Original Message ----- From: Carlos To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Saturday, July 2, 2016 9:49 AM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll LOL click on the Vote Now link and choose an option to make it official. This way everyone can also view the results of the poll. ----- Original Message ----- From: Loy To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 9:45 AM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll I never use narrator. ----- Original Message ----- From: Carlos To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Saturday, July 2, 2016 9:39 AM Subject: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll A new poll has been created: Just for fun and because we rarely use this feature. 1. I only use Narrator for emergencies 2. I never use Narrator 3. I use Narrator regularly Vote Now
More All Messages By This Member
Re: Get The Audible App for Windows 10 Lynn White #26979 Thank you Joseph. That helps big time. toggle quoted messageShow quoted text On 7/2/2016 11:16 AM, Joseph Lee wrote: Hi, Once the Store opens, press Control+E, search for Audible and press ENTER (note that you may needto sign into MS Account to download it unless situation has changed). Cheers, Joseph -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Lynn White Sent: Saturday, July 2, 2016 8:57 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: [TechTalk] Get The Audible App for Windows 10 I have just spnt a very frustrating time in the Windows store trying to download the Audible app so that I can read books on my Victor Stream. Can anyone suggest a more direct way to get this. The Audible page takes you directly to the Windows store. Windows will not allow you to down the app for Windows 7. Thanks for any help.
More All Messages By This Member
Re: Gun Technique, Hunting and Technology Jeremy <jeremy.richards7@...> #26978 Wow! that is freakin insane! JR toggle quoted messageShow quoted text -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of James Bentley Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 9:07 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Gun Technique, Hunting and Technology The United States military has a computerized rifle and scope combination. It first takes a photo of the entire target area. Next, the shooter uses a cursor on a touch screen to tell the computer where to put the bullet. Next, the shooter aims at the target. The computer fires the rifle only when it sees that the rifle is aimed with pin point accuracy. 3 inch Targets can be hit accurately at distances over two miles. -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:56 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Gun Technique, Hunting and Technology Finally, a relevant informative post. Thank you for contributing to my small pool of knowledge. :) And while on the subject matter, I'm thinking an audio beep of some sort might be able to alert the blind shooter than the object of interest is within the cross hairs of scope. Key will be determining what is target object and what is some sort of artifact. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Joe Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 8:47 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: [TechTalk] Gun Technique, Hunting and Technology There is now what some are calling a smart rifle, out of Texas. At $25,000, it's beyond the reach of most enthusiasts, but it can fetch that price for the level of precision it can automatically adjust to help the shooter acquire a target. If technology has leaped that far, one can almost wonder what credit, if any, the shooter gets, but my question is this: What technology have the hunters among us used to rely a little less on sighted assistance? I go deer hunting, but thus far I have leaned heavily on discrete cues from sighted companions to know where and when to fire. It's not a bad method. I've brought down three bucks in this fashion, and while hunting can often be enjoyed with companions, it would be nice to independently, but responsibly, engage and execute the target myself. Right now I use a laser to help my sighted companions get a better sense of where I am aiming. This allows me to hold and operate the rifle on my own, but again, it feels inefficient. Any tips would be welcomed. I'll note that while I am a member of a local shooting range, I have hesitated to obtain a gun permit. I understand my shooting would be optimal at very close range, but the risk of hitting someone innocent, however small, still weighs on my conscience. I realize for some the discussion of guns and hunting could be abhorrent. If so, feel free to email me off list. For whatever it's worth, I eat what I kill. I've never gone hunting for the mere sport. I've learned how to skin my own kill, and I suppose one could argue the knife skill in doing so could itself be viewed as a form of technology skill. Not to stray too far off topic here, but any number of disasters could occur in our lifetime and in our own backyard. In a scenario with no power and extensive food shortage, that Windows machine isn't going to be worth a whole lot except for maybe scrap metal. Our definition of "technology" just might revert to what technology used to be. That is, the means to survive. Best, Joe -- Musings of a Work in Progress: www.JoeOrozco.com/ Twitter: @ScribblingJoe
More All Messages By This Member
Re: Get The Audible App for Windows 10 Joseph Lee <joseph.lee22590@...> #26977 Hi, Once the Store opens, press Control+E, search for Audible and press ENTER (note that you may needto sign into MS Account to download it unless situation has changed). Cheers, Joseph toggle quoted messageShow quoted text -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Lynn White Sent: Saturday, July 2, 2016 8:57 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: [TechTalk] Get The Audible App for Windows 10 I have just spnt a very frustrating time in the Windows store trying to download the Audible app so that I can read books on my Victor Stream. Can anyone suggest a more direct way to get this. The Audible page takes you directly to the Windows store. Windows will not allow you to down the app for Windows 7. Thanks for any help.
More All Messages By This Member
Re: Gun Technique, Hunting and Technology James Bentley #26976 The United States military has a computerized rifle and scope combination. It first takes a photo of the entire target area. Next, the shooter uses a cursor on a touch screen to tell the computer where to put the bullet. Next, the shooter aims at the target. The computer fires the rifle only when it sees that the rifle is aimed with pin point accuracy. 3 inch Targets can be hit accurately at distances over two miles. toggle quoted messageShow quoted text -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:56 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Gun Technique, Hunting and Technology Finally, a relevant informative post. Thank you for contributing to my small pool of knowledge. :) And while on the subject matter, I'm thinking an audio beep of some sort might be able to alert the blind shooter than the object of interest is within the cross hairs of scope. Key will be determining what is target object and what is some sort of artifact. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Joe Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 8:47 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: [TechTalk] Gun Technique, Hunting and Technology There is now what some are calling a smart rifle, out of Texas. At $25,000, it's beyond the reach of most enthusiasts, but it can fetch that price for the level of precision it can automatically adjust to help the shooter acquire a target. If technology has leaped that far, one can almost wonder what credit, if any, the shooter gets, but my question is this: What technology have the hunters among us used to rely a little less on sighted assistance? I go deer hunting, but thus far I have leaned heavily on discrete cues from sighted companions to know where and when to fire. It's not a bad method. I've brought down three bucks in this fashion, and while hunting can often be enjoyed with companions, it would be nice to independently, but responsibly, engage and execute the target myself. Right now I use a laser to help my sighted companions get a better sense of where I am aiming. This allows me to hold and operate the rifle on my own, but again, it feels inefficient. Any tips would be welcomed. I'll note that while I am a member of a local shooting range, I have hesitated to obtain a gun permit. I understand my shooting would be optimal at very close range, but the risk of hitting someone innocent, however small, still weighs on my conscience. I realize for some the discussion of guns and hunting could be abhorrent. If so, feel free to email me off list. For whatever it's worth, I eat what I kill. I've never gone hunting for the mere sport. I've learned how to skin my own kill, and I suppose one could argue the knife skill in doing so could itself be viewed as a form of technology skill. Not to stray too far off topic here, but any number of disasters could occur in our lifetime and in our own backyard. In a scenario with no power and extensive food shortage, that Windows machine isn't going to be worth a whole lot except for maybe scrap metal. Our definition of "technology" just might revert to what technology used to be. That is, the means to survive. Best, Joe -- Musings of a Work in Progress: www.JoeOrozco.com/ Twitter: @ScribblingJoe
More All Messages By This Member
Re: FS podcast Lynn White #26975 I think that you are assuming that they have been making gobs of money before purchasing AI Square. If they were, why would they feel the need to buy them? I think that all of us need to take a breath and see what happens. I have my theories as what might happen. However, I could be so wrong in my thinking. toggle quoted messageShow quoted text On 7/2/2016 5:24 AM, Gerald Levy wrote: But now that the parent company of Freedom Scientific and AI Squared owns both JAWS and Window Eyes and thus has a virtual monopoly in the commercial screen reader market, what incentive do they have to offer deeply discounted prices to everyone? They have lucrative contracts with government and blind rehab agencies that guarantee them a steady income stream, so why should they care whether or not you can afford their products? And they have Jonathan Mosen in their back pocket to hawk their products. Of course, he pays nothing for JAWS or Open Book or any other FS product unlike the rest of us in exchange for promoting them. In all the years I have been listening to FSCasts, he has never uttered a negative comment about any FS product, even though he is now an independent contractor and no longer works directly for them. You would think that there is so much discontent over FS's unfair pricing policies that there would be mass defections to NVDA, but of course, this hasn't happened because for all of its faults, JAWS is still the best screen reader on the market. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Matt Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:35 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] FS podcast I would say different if they sold enough they would make money it might not be at 75 bucks but it might be at a couple of hundred. . their profit margin I sure is triple or more on the products. So they could sell to everyone for some kind of discount. They could sell say 75 bucks for convention goers and say 175 bucks for non goers. As the one going they could write this off taxes as advertisement .Also here again they would be making in the long run money off the SMA which is really just selling the product at a discounted price instead of making you buy it at full price for the next version. This is really all SMA is discounted price off the next version. SJMT Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Lynn White Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:10 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] FS podcast Maybe it's just a simply fact that Freedom Scientific is helping to promote people to go to conventions. It promotes good will and gets people involved. If they sold to every blind person the discounted price, they wouldn't make any kind of money at all. You would then have another screen reader possibly to fall by the wayside. On 7/1/2016 11:48 PM, Matt wrote: So if they are paying for the space then that would be even a another reason not to give the discount at all . but I sure them paying for the booth at the convention would come under advertisement and is taking off taxes. This still don't explain why not offer this to everyone not just convention goers. Like the Blind Bargains (A T Guys) they have a booth and they have sells as well but it is not limited to just convention goers . To me it would make sense to offer it to everyone and they would come out in the long run plus help a lot of people. The reason is that in the long run more than likely they would get the people that is buying it would keep the SMA up . which they make good money off them the SMA itself. Which is a lot better than it used to be since they lower the price on SMA Two years for 125 bucks is very good and the SMA is on sale at the convention as well but it is only for convention goers. Too me it just don't make sense as they would be more than likely in the long run making money . In fact at 75 bucks I bet they are still making money as they hope to sell enough they will make money. I just cannot help it I seem to have a problem with this. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carolyn Arnold Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 8:07 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] FS podcast Plus, the vendors at the conventions have to pay or the space that they have there. Bye for now, Carolyn -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Friday, July 1, 2016 4:40 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: [TechTalk] FS podcast Well this talks all about convention time. They have some really good deals but the thing is it is only for those that goes to the convention. I personally think this is just so wrong! Why can they not offer this to everyone!? Like Jaws is just 75 bucks but you have to go to the convention and be registered. Why not just offer this to all the blind community? To me this just don't seem exactly right! I might be wrong but it should be offered to anyone who wants it! or any of the products they are selling at a discount. You know not everyone can afford or even get to these places. But here is the podcast below. FS podcast 128 <http://podcast.freedomscientific.com/FSCast/episodes/FSCast 128-Conference_Specials,MathML,Mike_Wood.mp3> http://podcast.freedomscientific.com/FSCast/episodes/FSCast1 28-Conference_Specials,MathML,Mike_Wood.mp3 Matt.from.florida@gmail.com <mailto:Matt.from.florida@gmail.com>
More All Messages By This Member
Get The Audible App for Windows 10 Lynn White #26974 I have just spnt a very frustrating time in the Windows store trying to download the Audible app so that I can read books on my Victor Stream. Can anyone suggest a more direct way to get this. The Audible page takes you directly to the Windows store. Windows will not allow you to down the app for Windows 7. Thanks for any help.
More All Messages By This Member
Re: Gun Technique, Hunting and Technology Jeremy <jeremy.richards7@...> #26973 Finally, a relevant informative post. Thank you for contributing to my small pool of knowledge. :) And while on the subject matter, I'm thinking an audio beep of some sort might be able to alert the blind shooter than the object of interest is within the cross hairs of scope. Key will be determining what is target object and what is some sort of artifact. JR toggle quoted messageShow quoted text -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Joe Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 8:47 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: [TechTalk] Gun Technique, Hunting and Technology There is now what some are calling a smart rifle, out of Texas. At $25,000, it's beyond the reach of most enthusiasts, but it can fetch that price for the level of precision it can automatically adjust to help the shooter acquire a target. If technology has leaped that far, one can almost wonder what credit, if any, the shooter gets, but my question is this: What technology have the hunters among us used to rely a little less on sighted assistance? I go deer hunting, but thus far I have leaned heavily on discrete cues from sighted companions to know where and when to fire. It's not a bad method. I've brought down three bucks in this fashion, and while hunting can often be enjoyed with companions, it would be nice to independently, but responsibly, engage and execute the target myself. Right now I use a laser to help my sighted companions get a better sense of where I am aiming. This allows me to hold and operate the rifle on my own, but again, it feels inefficient. Any tips would be welcomed. I'll note that while I am a member of a local shooting range, I have hesitated to obtain a gun permit. I understand my shooting would be optimal at very close range, but the risk of hitting someone innocent, however small, still weighs on my conscience. I realize for some the discussion of guns and hunting could be abhorrent. If so, feel free to email me off list. For whatever it's worth, I eat what I kill. I've never gone hunting for the mere sport. I've learned how to skin my own kill, and I suppose one could argue the knife skill in doing so could itself be viewed as a form of technology skill. Not to stray too far off topic here, but any number of disasters could occur in our lifetime and in our own backyard. In a scenario with no power and extensive food shortage, that Windows machine isn't going to be worth a whole lot except for maybe scrap metal. Our definition of "technology" just might revert to what technology used to be. That is, the means to survive. Best, Joe -- Musings of a Work in Progress: www.JoeOrozco.com/ Twitter: @ScribblingJoe
More All Messages By This Member
Re: definition for , technology, was, all about guns and safety was Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Carlos #26972 Please let's try to get along ladies and gentlemen. The fact is that despite personal opinions, guns are a product of technology. This is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of fact. toggle quoted messageShow quoted text ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Bentley" <bentleyj1952@att.net> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 11:37 AM Subject: Re: definition for , technology, was, all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident I suspect that you misunderstood my post. Why is it OK for you to clarify to Jerimy what is acceptible for this list but, my clarification is making a big deal out of this. Can we please respect each other and our fellow listers and drop this thread...Please. James -----Original Message----- From: Matt Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:27 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: definition for , technology, was, all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Why are you making such a big deal of this? you seem to be the only one! This list as Carlos has told you is fairly flexible and this is why it is such a great list! Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of James Bentley Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 11:10 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: definition for , technology, was, all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident tech·nol·o·gy /tekˈnäləjē/ noun noun: technology; plural noun: technologies the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes, especially in industry. "advances in computer technology" •machinery and equipment developed from the application of scientific knowledge. •the branch of knowledge dealing with engineering or applied sciences. -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 9:57 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident I'm actually making a friendly request for the gun enthusists on the list to help me understand what facet of guns is technology related? This is a friendly request though it may come off as a challenge. Again, I think I might learn something I had not considered in the past. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:36 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Are guns not technology? As you say, just about anything can be considered technology. Anything manufactured for use as a tool qualifies as technology and while I agree that there should be a reasonable common sense line in defining how it relates to the list, it certainly doesn't only apply to computers and electronics even taking that into account. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy" <jeremy.richards7@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:21 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Ok, but just so I learn something, what makes the gun topic tech related? JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Joe Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:17 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hell, can we keep the gun talk on this list for now? One less list to subscribe to, and I think Carlos has the right of it in considering guns as technology. Just my two cents. Joe -- Musings of a Work in Progress: www.JoeOrozco.com/ Twitter: @ScribblingJoe -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 8:26 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Generally electronic and accessible technology is what most members are interested in discussing, but I don't object to other types of technology being discussed within reason. It is a general technology discussion list, not exclusively for discussing computer related technology. However, I expect people to use a bit of common sense. Science provides technology, but it is not technology. We will handle unusual topics on an individual basis, but basically as long as it does not strain the credulity and patience of most members, I am willing to be flexible and open minded. Of course, if a slightly offbeat topic seems to be dragging on for too long or irritating too many members, I may request that we move on at some point. Also, while the majority of members are blind and I will not go out of my way to promote the list in the sighted community, I have no objections to sighted individuals who might wish to subscribe and participate. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy" <jeremy.richards7@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:51 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hi Carlos, In hopes of not stepping on toes, I think you might want to define what is meant by technology as it relates to this list. I don't think most would consider guns technology in terms of the scope of blind members wanting to know about computer sciences and general computing. As is, it appears that just about anything can be considered technology is one thinks about it. Would the study of ants be considered technology if an electronic device is used to watch them at work? Would Woman's make-up be on topic on this list if someone twists him or herself in pretzels to box up a question using a technology slant? I think most list members consider computers and all they do for us as on topic, but seismographs and oscilloscopes might not be as relevant. ...Just looking for a bit more clarity. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 4:12 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Guns are most certainly technology and I personally don't have a problem with the discussion, but I believe some members might not be quite as understanding so we might want to close this topic or move it to the chat list as was suggested. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:42 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well it not just because it a gun thread if it was about guns and the technology that could be implemted on them then it would be on topic. But just guns in general no . or if it is abut guns and blindness it would be on topic. As carlos is fairly flexable and most anything technology wise or blindness related is on topic . But I have no problem about moving to the chat room. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:31 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It might be time for the chat list as this topic has now morphed into some sort of gun thread. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 10:28 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well this is true on single action revolvers of today and it is still the safety way is to let the hammer set on an empty chamber. Now you could do the same for a double action as well let it set on the empty chamber but you don't have to . As the trigger pull unless modified is usually a fairly heavy pull anyhow. . but the safest way is not to put your finger on the trigger till you are ready to pull it. they really have 4types of revolvers as I know. They are single shot, single action, double action only and DASA (Double action plus single action) another words you can just pull the trigger or you can cock the hammer and pull the trigger. Your choice. Most double action only does not have an external hammer. Now I was brought up with guns and had them around me and learn at every early age about them and how to handle them. But you need to get training on handling them and using them as well as training on the laws and how to protect yourself with them. it is much more than just going out and buying gun. This is just stupid. I not a big fan of most regulation but some I am and some I have no problem with them at all. But I don't know if we are not sort of straying off topic and off the the subject as well so this might need to be moved to the chat room. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of James Bentley Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:00 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You can't even pull the trigger on a single action revolver unless the hammer is cocked back in to the firing position. You never cock the gun unless you intend to discharge it. Most double action revolvers do not have a safety because the gun still needs to be cocked before it can be fired. Or, the necessary trigger travel to discharge the gun is so great that it would be almost impossible to accidentily pull the trigger far enough to shoot the gun. James -----Original Message----- From: Matt Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 11:33 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You can on most all pistols you cannot on revolvers the safety is not to pull the trigger. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Pamela Dominguez Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 10:26 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident I think you can lock the trigger. Pam. -----Original Message----- From: Rajmund Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 6:19 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident My problem with a gun would be, what if I accidently trigger it in my pocket? Or sit on it, or whatever? Knife, cane, spray, they're all good, but I'd be worried with a gun. Sent from a BrailleNote ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Date sent: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 18:12:42 -0400 Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Nothing wrong with pepper spray in certain events but you don't take pepper spray to a gun fight or a knife fight or even a baseball bat fight. If you did you would be on the losing end of the fight for sure! You can have lots of things in your protection tool box! Pepper spray is one of them. But it should not be the only thing. You should have a knife , stun gun or Taser and a gun for sure a good old fashion hickory cane with a good hook to it that is very pointed at the end of the hook is good or asord cane is good. But a water gun is not much good unless you have something besides water in it. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Rajmund Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 4:55 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hi All, Speaking of protection, I'd feel safer with a bottle of pepper spray myself, too. I have worries about guns myself, but the good old pepper spray. Sent from a BrailleNote ----- Original Message ----- From: "Laz" <laz@talkingmp3players.com To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Date sent: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 14:55:52 -0400 Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Gerald, I really hope you're just joking with all this drivel. I know one of these so-called "blind extremists" who carries a gun and he carries it for protection only. The times he has shot it in public was because he was being threatened by four sighted extremist thugs also known as criminals, who were threatening to not only rob him but cause him physical harm. He took out his gun and shot once, straight up into the air. Yes, the extremist thugs quickly ran away in fright and I hope they also needed to do some laundry quickly afterward. Who knows what would have happened to my friend if he hadn't been legally carrying his weapon. But I know I'm wasting my time with telling you that as you're not for the individual and his rights but for some other agenda instead. BTW there are more deaths due to automobile accidents than there are due to shootings so this brings it back around to your glass half full attitude aimed at self-driving cars which have caused how many deaths so far... Laz On 7/1/16, Gerald Levy <bwaylimited@verizon.net> wrote: That's a damn good question. Why, indeed, are some blind extremists allowed to walk around with guns? Oh, excuse me, it's their constitutional right. Never mind that they place the rest of us at risk. It's bad enough that terrorists and sociopaths are allowed to buy and own firearms. But blind consumers as well? No wonder this country is a screwed up mess that has become beholden to dangerous demagogues like Donald Trump. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Carlos Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:45 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It is nonsense because it is simply not possible. And if the lawmakers were so determined to put a halt to any technology that is not 100% safe and foolproof, there are many types of technology we would not have access to in modern society. If the lawmakers in Washington care so much about keeping dangerous technology out of the hands of the blind, then why are there several blind individuals who are still being allowed to legally own firearms? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerald Levy" <bwaylimited@verizon.net To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:38 PM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You may think that making self-driving cars 100% foolproof is nonsense. But you can bet that the lawmakers in Washington and elsewhere won't see it that way. They will demand that self-driving vehicles be made as close to 100% foolproof as possible before they consider enacting legislation that would allow blind drivers to operate them without the accompaniment of a sighted driver. That's just the realities of politics in a predominantly sighted world. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Carlos Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:11 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Who knows when blind people will be allowed to manage these types of cars. Will it be any time soon? Probably not, but there is a difference between soon and never. But as far as I'm concerned, the other issue here is this ridiculous assumption that somehow the technology should be or ever can be made 100% safe and foolproof. That is just nonsense and trying to predict the future of the technology based on one accident or even several is just more nonsense. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:59 PM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well I usually don't or try not to look at things with a half empty blass but a half full one. But in some cases this is just not possible. I have to agree with him on this Gerald . It is also not just the US legislature but from state to state. Just like all driving laws vary from state to state.. It is called states' rights and there forth each state will more than likely implement it on law on driving driverless cars. I also think they would require very special training even for the sited but certainly for the blind person as well! I just don't see the blind being able to do this in my life time and I hope to be here around another 30 years. I am coming up on my 58th birthday. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Gerald Levy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:49 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It really doesn't matter what caused the accident. The bottom line is that it will be a very long time, if ever, before blind consumers are allowed to operate one of these gizmos by themselves. One fatal accident is still one fatal accident too many. These vehicles must be made 100% safe and foolproof before the powers that be in Washington will let blind drivers behind the wheel without the accompaniment of a sighted driver in the passenger's seat. Sorry to throw water on your parade. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:26 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Again, another reflexive post of yours. There's lots of reasons why this could have happened. It is likely these multiple car manufacturers are using different gPS databases and supporting software, as well as other yet to be determined reasons, so what happened here may not happen to other researchers who are using more developed databases--the results depend on lots of variables. The Google car has not had this type of history, and the single accident it had was due to a human disabling the computer and taking over the driving. Gerald, I don't think technology is for you, so you might consider solutions which are less stressful to you. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Gerald Levy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 9:18 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident For those of you who are chomping at the bit to buy one of those newfangled self-driving cars that may some day revolutionize the lives of us blind consumers, not so fast. The race to develop a safe and reliable self-driving vehicle suffered a major setback recently when a Tesla all-electric self-driving car was involved in a fatal accident that killed the driver while it was operating in self-driving mode. I guess it's back to the drawing board: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/business/self-driving-tesla-fat al-crash-investigation.html?_r=0 Gerald -- Affordably priced Accessible Talking MP3 Players, Accessible phones, Bluetooth devices, and accessories http://www.talkingmp3players.com/ Email: laz@talkingmp3players.com Phone: 727-498-0121 Skype: lazmesa Personal Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/laz.mesa Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/Talkingmp3players?_rdr ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7640 / Virus Database: 4613/12537 - Release Date: 07/01/16
More All Messages By This Member
Gun Technique, Hunting and Technology Joe #26971 There is now what some are calling a smart rifle, out of Texas. At $25,000, it's beyond the reach of most enthusiasts, but it can fetch that price for the level of precision it can automatically adjust to help the shooter acquire a target. If technology has leaped that far, one can almost wonder what credit, if any, the shooter gets, but my question is this: What technology have the hunters among us used to rely a little less on sighted assistance? I go deer hunting, but thus far I have leaned heavily on discrete cues from sighted companions to know where and when to fire. It's not a bad method. I've brought down three bucks in this fashion, and while hunting can often be enjoyed with companions, it would be nice to independently, but responsibly, engage and execute the target myself. Right now I use a laser to help my sighted companions get a better sense of where I am aiming. This allows me to hold and operate the rifle on my own, but again, it feels inefficient. Any tips would be welcomed. I'll note that while I am a member of a local shooting range, I have hesitated to obtain a gun permit. I understand my shooting would be optimal at very close range, but the risk of hitting someone innocent, however small, still weighs on my conscience. I realize for some the discussion of guns and hunting could be abhorrent. If so, feel free to email me off list. For whatever it's worth, I eat what I kill. I've never gone hunting for the mere sport. I've learned how to skin my own kill, and I suppose one could argue the knife skill in doing so could itself be viewed as a form of technology skill. Not to stray too far off topic here, but any number of disasters could occur in our lifetime and in our own backyard. In a scenario with no power and extensive food shortage, that Windows machine isn't going to be worth a whole lot except for maybe scrap metal. Our definition of "technology" just might revert to what technology used to be. That is, the means to survive. Best, Joe -- Musings of a Work in Progress: www.JoeOrozco.com/ Twitter: @ScribblingJoe
More All Messages By This Member
Re: definition for , technology, was, all about guns and safety was Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Matt #26970 It was not again at you ! Sorry you took it that way! I don't know everyone name and not going to try to remember everyone name! Matt.from.florida@gmail.com toggle quoted messageShow quoted text -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of James Bentley Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 11:37 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: definition for , technology, was, all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident I suspect that you misunderstood my post. Why is it OK for you to clarify to Jerimy what is acceptible for this list but, my clarification is making a big deal out of this. Can we please respect each other and our fellow listers and drop this thread...Please. James -----Original Message----- From: Matt Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:27 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: definition for , technology, was, all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Why are you making such a big deal of this? you seem to be the only one! This list as Carlos has told you is fairly flexible and this is why it is such a great list! Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of James Bentley Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 11:10 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: definition for , technology, was, all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident tech·nol·o·gy /tekˈnäləjē/ noun noun: technology; plural noun: technologies the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes, especially in industry. "advances in computer technology" •machinery and equipment developed from the application of scientific knowledge. •the branch of knowledge dealing with engineering or applied sciences. -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 9:57 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident I'm actually making a friendly request for the gun enthusists on the list to help me understand what facet of guns is technology related? This is a friendly request though it may come off as a challenge. Again, I think I might learn something I had not considered in the past. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:36 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Are guns not technology? As you say, just about anything can be considered technology. Anything manufactured for use as a tool qualifies as technology and while I agree that there should be a reasonable common sense line in defining how it relates to the list, it certainly doesn't only apply to computers and electronics even taking that into account. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy" <jeremy.richards7@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:21 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Ok, but just so I learn something, what makes the gun topic tech related? JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Joe Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:17 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hell, can we keep the gun talk on this list for now? One less list to subscribe to, and I think Carlos has the right of it in considering guns as technology. Just my two cents. Joe -- Musings of a Work in Progress: www.JoeOrozco.com/ Twitter: @ScribblingJoe -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 8:26 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Generally electronic and accessible technology is what most members are interested in discussing, but I don't object to other types of technology being discussed within reason. It is a general technology discussion list, not exclusively for discussing computer related technology. However, I expect people to use a bit of common sense. Science provides technology, but it is not technology. We will handle unusual topics on an individual basis, but basically as long as it does not strain the credulity and patience of most members, I am willing to be flexible and open minded. Of course, if a slightly offbeat topic seems to be dragging on for too long or irritating too many members, I may request that we move on at some point. Also, while the majority of members are blind and I will not go out of my way to promote the list in the sighted community, I have no objections to sighted individuals who might wish to subscribe and participate. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy" <jeremy.richards7@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:51 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hi Carlos, In hopes of not stepping on toes, I think you might want to define what is meant by technology as it relates to this list. I don't think most would consider guns technology in terms of the scope of blind members wanting to know about computer sciences and general computing. As is, it appears that just about anything can be considered technology is one thinks about it. Would the study of ants be considered technology if an electronic device is used to watch them at work? Would Woman's make-up be on topic on this list if someone twists him or herself in pretzels to box up a question using a technology slant? I think most list members consider computers and all they do for us as on topic, but seismographs and oscilloscopes might not be as relevant. ...Just looking for a bit more clarity. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 4:12 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Guns are most certainly technology and I personally don't have a problem with the discussion, but I believe some members might not be quite as understanding so we might want to close this topic or move it to the chat list as was suggested. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:42 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well it not just because it a gun thread if it was about guns and the technology that could be implemted on them then it would be on topic. But just guns in general no . or if it is abut guns and blindness it would be on topic. As carlos is fairly flexable and most anything technology wise or blindness related is on topic . But I have no problem about moving to the chat room. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:31 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It might be time for the chat list as this topic has now morphed into some sort of gun thread. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 10:28 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well this is true on single action revolvers of today and it is still the safety way is to let the hammer set on an empty chamber. Now you could do the same for a double action as well let it set on the empty chamber but you don't have to . As the trigger pull unless modified is usually a fairly heavy pull anyhow. . but the safest way is not to put your finger on the trigger till you are ready to pull it. they really have 4types of revolvers as I know. They are single shot, single action, double action only and DASA (Double action plus single action) another words you can just pull the trigger or you can cock the hammer and pull the trigger. Your choice. Most double action only does not have an external hammer. Now I was brought up with guns and had them around me and learn at every early age about them and how to handle them. But you need to get training on handling them and using them as well as training on the laws and how to protect yourself with them. it is much more than just going out and buying gun. This is just stupid. I not a big fan of most regulation but some I am and some I have no problem with them at all. But I don't know if we are not sort of straying off topic and off the the subject as well so this might need to be moved to the chat room. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of James Bentley Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:00 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You can't even pull the trigger on a single action revolver unless the hammer is cocked back in to the firing position. You never cock the gun unless you intend to discharge it. Most double action revolvers do not have a safety because the gun still needs to be cocked before it can be fired. Or, the necessary trigger travel to discharge the gun is so great that it would be almost impossible to accidentily pull the trigger far enough to shoot the gun. James -----Original Message----- From: Matt Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 11:33 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You can on most all pistols you cannot on revolvers the safety is not to pull the trigger. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Pamela Dominguez Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 10:26 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident I think you can lock the trigger. Pam. -----Original Message----- From: Rajmund Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 6:19 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident My problem with a gun would be, what if I accidently trigger it in my pocket? Or sit on it, or whatever? Knife, cane, spray, they're all good, but I'd be worried with a gun. Sent from a BrailleNote ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Date sent: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 18:12:42 -0400 Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Nothing wrong with pepper spray in certain events but you don't take pepper spray to a gun fight or a knife fight or even a baseball bat fight. If you did you would be on the losing end of the fight for sure! You can have lots of things in your protection tool box! Pepper spray is one of them. But it should not be the only thing. You should have a knife , stun gun or Taser and a gun for sure a good old fashion hickory cane with a good hook to it that is very pointed at the end of the hook is good or asord cane is good. But a water gun is not much good unless you have something besides water in it. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Rajmund Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 4:55 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hi All, Speaking of protection, I'd feel safer with a bottle of pepper spray myself, too. I have worries about guns myself, but the good old pepper spray. Sent from a BrailleNote ----- Original Message ----- From: "Laz" <laz@talkingmp3players.com To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Date sent: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 14:55:52 -0400 Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Gerald, I really hope you're just joking with all this drivel. I know one of these so-called "blind extremists" who carries a gun and he carries it for protection only. The times he has shot it in public was because he was being threatened by four sighted extremist thugs also known as criminals, who were threatening to not only rob him but cause him physical harm. He took out his gun and shot once, straight up into the air. Yes, the extremist thugs quickly ran away in fright and I hope they also needed to do some laundry quickly afterward. Who knows what would have happened to my friend if he hadn't been legally carrying his weapon. But I know I'm wasting my time with telling you that as you're not for the individual and his rights but for some other agenda instead. BTW there are more deaths due to automobile accidents than there are due to shootings so this brings it back around to your glass half full attitude aimed at self-driving cars which have caused how many deaths so far... Laz On 7/1/16, Gerald Levy <bwaylimited@verizon.net> wrote: That's a damn good question. Why, indeed, are some blind extremists allowed to walk around with guns? Oh, excuse me, it's their constitutional right. Never mind that they place the rest of us at risk. It's bad enough that terrorists and sociopaths are allowed to buy and own firearms. But blind consumers as well? No wonder this country is a screwed up mess that has become beholden to dangerous demagogues like Donald Trump. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Carlos Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:45 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It is nonsense because it is simply not possible. And if the lawmakers were so determined to put a halt to any technology that is not 100% safe and foolproof, there are many types of technology we would not have access to in modern society. If the lawmakers in Washington care so much about keeping dangerous technology out of the hands of the blind, then why are there several blind individuals who are still being allowed to legally own firearms? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerald Levy" <bwaylimited@verizon.net To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:38 PM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You may think that making self-driving cars 100% foolproof is nonsense. But you can bet that the lawmakers in Washington and elsewhere won't see it that way. They will demand that self-driving vehicles be made as close to 100% foolproof as possible before they consider enacting legislation that would allow blind drivers to operate them without the accompaniment of a sighted driver. That's just the realities of politics in a predominantly sighted world. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Carlos Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:11 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Who knows when blind people will be allowed to manage these types of cars. Will it be any time soon? Probably not, but there is a difference between soon and never. But as far as I'm concerned, the other issue here is this ridiculous assumption that somehow the technology should be or ever can be made 100% safe and foolproof. That is just nonsense and trying to predict the future of the technology based on one accident or even several is just more nonsense. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:59 PM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well I usually don't or try not to look at things with a half empty blass but a half full one. But in some cases this is just not possible. I have to agree with him on this Gerald . It is also not just the US legislature but from state to state. Just like all driving laws vary from state to state.. It is called states' rights and there forth each state will more than likely implement it on law on driving driverless cars. I also think they would require very special training even for the sited but certainly for the blind person as well! I just don't see the blind being able to do this in my life time and I hope to be here around another 30 years. I am coming up on my 58th birthday. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Gerald Levy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:49 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It really doesn't matter what caused the accident. The bottom line is that it will be a very long time, if ever, before blind consumers are allowed to operate one of these gizmos by themselves. One fatal accident is still one fatal accident too many. These vehicles must be made 100% safe and foolproof before the powers that be in Washington will let blind drivers behind the wheel without the accompaniment of a sighted driver in the passenger's seat. Sorry to throw water on your parade. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:26 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Again, another reflexive post of yours. There's lots of reasons why this could have happened. It is likely these multiple car manufacturers are using different gPS databases and supporting software, as well as other yet to be determined reasons, so what happened here may not happen to other researchers who are using more developed databases--the results depend on lots of variables. The Google car has not had this type of history, and the single accident it had was due to a human disabling the computer and taking over the driving. Gerald, I don't think technology is for you, so you might consider solutions which are less stressful to you. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Gerald Levy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 9:18 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident For those of you who are chomping at the bit to buy one of those newfangled self-driving cars that may some day revolutionize the lives of us blind consumers, not so fast. The race to develop a safe and reliable self-driving vehicle suffered a major setback recently when a Tesla all-electric self-driving car was involved in a fatal accident that killed the driver while it was operating in self-driving mode. I guess it's back to the drawing board: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/business/self-driving-tesla-fat al-crash-investigation.html?_r=0 Gerald -- Affordably priced Accessible Talking MP3 Players, Accessible phones, Bluetooth devices, and accessories http://www.talkingmp3players.com/ Email: laz@talkingmp3players.com Phone: 727-498-0121 Skype: lazmesa Personal Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/laz.mesa Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/Talkingmp3players?_rdr ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7640 / Virus Database: 4613/12537 - Release Date: 07/01/16
More All Messages By This Member
Re: definition for , technology, was, all about guns and safety was Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident James Bentley #26969 I suspect that you misunderstood my post. Why is it OK for you to clarify to Jerimy what is acceptible for this list but, my clarification is making a big deal out of this. Can we please respect each other and our fellow listers and drop this thread...Please. James toggle quoted messageShow quoted text -----Original Message----- From: Matt Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:27 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: definition for , technology, was, all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Why are you making such a big deal of this? you seem to be the only one! This list as Carlos has told you is fairly flexible and this is why it is such a great list! Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of James Bentley Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 11:10 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: definition for , technology, was, all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident tech·nol·o·gy /tekˈnäləjē/ noun noun: technology; plural noun: technologies the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes, especially in industry. "advances in computer technology" •machinery and equipment developed from the application of scientific knowledge. •the branch of knowledge dealing with engineering or applied sciences. -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 9:57 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident I'm actually making a friendly request for the gun enthusists on the list to help me understand what facet of guns is technology related? This is a friendly request though it may come off as a challenge. Again, I think I might learn something I had not considered in the past. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:36 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Are guns not technology? As you say, just about anything can be considered technology. Anything manufactured for use as a tool qualifies as technology and while I agree that there should be a reasonable common sense line in defining how it relates to the list, it certainly doesn't only apply to computers and electronics even taking that into account. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy" <jeremy.richards7@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:21 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Ok, but just so I learn something, what makes the gun topic tech related? JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Joe Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:17 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hell, can we keep the gun talk on this list for now? One less list to subscribe to, and I think Carlos has the right of it in considering guns as technology. Just my two cents. Joe -- Musings of a Work in Progress: www.JoeOrozco.com/ Twitter: @ScribblingJoe -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 8:26 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Generally electronic and accessible technology is what most members are interested in discussing, but I don't object to other types of technology being discussed within reason. It is a general technology discussion list, not exclusively for discussing computer related technology. However, I expect people to use a bit of common sense. Science provides technology, but it is not technology. We will handle unusual topics on an individual basis, but basically as long as it does not strain the credulity and patience of most members, I am willing to be flexible and open minded. Of course, if a slightly offbeat topic seems to be dragging on for too long or irritating too many members, I may request that we move on at some point. Also, while the majority of members are blind and I will not go out of my way to promote the list in the sighted community, I have no objections to sighted individuals who might wish to subscribe and participate. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy" <jeremy.richards7@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:51 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hi Carlos, In hopes of not stepping on toes, I think you might want to define what is meant by technology as it relates to this list. I don't think most would consider guns technology in terms of the scope of blind members wanting to know about computer sciences and general computing. As is, it appears that just about anything can be considered technology is one thinks about it. Would the study of ants be considered technology if an electronic device is used to watch them at work? Would Woman's make-up be on topic on this list if someone twists him or herself in pretzels to box up a question using a technology slant? I think most list members consider computers and all they do for us as on topic, but seismographs and oscilloscopes might not be as relevant. ...Just looking for a bit more clarity. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 4:12 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Guns are most certainly technology and I personally don't have a problem with the discussion, but I believe some members might not be quite as understanding so we might want to close this topic or move it to the chat list as was suggested. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:42 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well it not just because it a gun thread if it was about guns and the technology that could be implemted on them then it would be on topic. But just guns in general no . or if it is abut guns and blindness it would be on topic. As carlos is fairly flexable and most anything technology wise or blindness related is on topic . But I have no problem about moving to the chat room. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:31 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It might be time for the chat list as this topic has now morphed into some sort of gun thread. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 10:28 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well this is true on single action revolvers of today and it is still the safety way is to let the hammer set on an empty chamber. Now you could do the same for a double action as well let it set on the empty chamber but you don't have to . As the trigger pull unless modified is usually a fairly heavy pull anyhow. . but the safest way is not to put your finger on the trigger till you are ready to pull it. they really have 4types of revolvers as I know. They are single shot, single action, double action only and DASA (Double action plus single action) another words you can just pull the trigger or you can cock the hammer and pull the trigger. Your choice. Most double action only does not have an external hammer. Now I was brought up with guns and had them around me and learn at every early age about them and how to handle them. But you need to get training on handling them and using them as well as training on the laws and how to protect yourself with them. it is much more than just going out and buying gun. This is just stupid. I not a big fan of most regulation but some I am and some I have no problem with them at all. But I don't know if we are not sort of straying off topic and off the the subject as well so this might need to be moved to the chat room. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of James Bentley Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:00 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You can't even pull the trigger on a single action revolver unless the hammer is cocked back in to the firing position. You never cock the gun unless you intend to discharge it. Most double action revolvers do not have a safety because the gun still needs to be cocked before it can be fired. Or, the necessary trigger travel to discharge the gun is so great that it would be almost impossible to accidentily pull the trigger far enough to shoot the gun. James -----Original Message----- From: Matt Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 11:33 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You can on most all pistols you cannot on revolvers the safety is not to pull the trigger. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Pamela Dominguez Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 10:26 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident I think you can lock the trigger. Pam. -----Original Message----- From: Rajmund Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 6:19 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident My problem with a gun would be, what if I accidently trigger it in my pocket? Or sit on it, or whatever? Knife, cane, spray, they're all good, but I'd be worried with a gun. Sent from a BrailleNote ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Date sent: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 18:12:42 -0400 Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Nothing wrong with pepper spray in certain events but you don't take pepper spray to a gun fight or a knife fight or even a baseball bat fight. If you did you would be on the losing end of the fight for sure! You can have lots of things in your protection tool box! Pepper spray is one of them. But it should not be the only thing. You should have a knife , stun gun or Taser and a gun for sure a good old fashion hickory cane with a good hook to it that is very pointed at the end of the hook is good or asord cane is good. But a water gun is not much good unless you have something besides water in it. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Rajmund Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 4:55 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hi All, Speaking of protection, I'd feel safer with a bottle of pepper spray myself, too. I have worries about guns myself, but the good old pepper spray. Sent from a BrailleNote ----- Original Message ----- From: "Laz" <laz@talkingmp3players.com To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Date sent: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 14:55:52 -0400 Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Gerald, I really hope you're just joking with all this drivel. I know one of these so-called "blind extremists" who carries a gun and he carries it for protection only. The times he has shot it in public was because he was being threatened by four sighted extremist thugs also known as criminals, who were threatening to not only rob him but cause him physical harm. He took out his gun and shot once, straight up into the air. Yes, the extremist thugs quickly ran away in fright and I hope they also needed to do some laundry quickly afterward. Who knows what would have happened to my friend if he hadn't been legally carrying his weapon. But I know I'm wasting my time with telling you that as you're not for the individual and his rights but for some other agenda instead. BTW there are more deaths due to automobile accidents than there are due to shootings so this brings it back around to your glass half full attitude aimed at self-driving cars which have caused how many deaths so far... Laz On 7/1/16, Gerald Levy <bwaylimited@verizon.net> wrote: That's a damn good question. Why, indeed, are some blind extremists allowed to walk around with guns? Oh, excuse me, it's their constitutional right. Never mind that they place the rest of us at risk. It's bad enough that terrorists and sociopaths are allowed to buy and own firearms. But blind consumers as well? No wonder this country is a screwed up mess that has become beholden to dangerous demagogues like Donald Trump. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Carlos Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:45 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It is nonsense because it is simply not possible. And if the lawmakers were so determined to put a halt to any technology that is not 100% safe and foolproof, there are many types of technology we would not have access to in modern society. If the lawmakers in Washington care so much about keeping dangerous technology out of the hands of the blind, then why are there several blind individuals who are still being allowed to legally own firearms? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerald Levy" <bwaylimited@verizon.net To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:38 PM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You may think that making self-driving cars 100% foolproof is nonsense. But you can bet that the lawmakers in Washington and elsewhere won't see it that way. They will demand that self-driving vehicles be made as close to 100% foolproof as possible before they consider enacting legislation that would allow blind drivers to operate them without the accompaniment of a sighted driver. That's just the realities of politics in a predominantly sighted world. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Carlos Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:11 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Who knows when blind people will be allowed to manage these types of cars. Will it be any time soon? Probably not, but there is a difference between soon and never. But as far as I'm concerned, the other issue here is this ridiculous assumption that somehow the technology should be or ever can be made 100% safe and foolproof. That is just nonsense and trying to predict the future of the technology based on one accident or even several is just more nonsense. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:59 PM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well I usually don't or try not to look at things with a half empty blass but a half full one. But in some cases this is just not possible. I have to agree with him on this Gerald . It is also not just the US legislature but from state to state. Just like all driving laws vary from state to state.. It is called states' rights and there forth each state will more than likely implement it on law on driving driverless cars. I also think they would require very special training even for the sited but certainly for the blind person as well! I just don't see the blind being able to do this in my life time and I hope to be here around another 30 years. I am coming up on my 58th birthday. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Gerald Levy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:49 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It really doesn't matter what caused the accident. The bottom line is that it will be a very long time, if ever, before blind consumers are allowed to operate one of these gizmos by themselves. One fatal accident is still one fatal accident too many. These vehicles must be made 100% safe and foolproof before the powers that be in Washington will let blind drivers behind the wheel without the accompaniment of a sighted driver in the passenger's seat. Sorry to throw water on your parade. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:26 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Again, another reflexive post of yours. There's lots of reasons why this could have happened. It is likely these multiple car manufacturers are using different gPS databases and supporting software, as well as other yet to be determined reasons, so what happened here may not happen to other researchers who are using more developed databases--the results depend on lots of variables. The Google car has not had this type of history, and the single accident it had was due to a human disabling the computer and taking over the driving. Gerald, I don't think technology is for you, so you might consider solutions which are less stressful to you. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Gerald Levy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 9:18 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident For those of you who are chomping at the bit to buy one of those newfangled self-driving cars that may some day revolutionize the lives of us blind consumers, not so fast. The race to develop a safe and reliable self-driving vehicle suffered a major setback recently when a Tesla all-electric self-driving car was involved in a fatal accident that killed the driver while it was operating in self-driving mode. I guess it's back to the drawing board: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/business/self-driving-tesla-fat al-crash-investigation.html?_r=0 Gerald -- Affordably priced Accessible Talking MP3 Players, Accessible phones, Bluetooth devices, and accessories http://www.talkingmp3players.com/ Email: laz@talkingmp3players.com Phone: 727-498-0121 Skype: lazmesa Personal Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/laz.mesa Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/Talkingmp3players?_rdr ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7640 / Virus Database: 4613/12537 - Release Date: 07/01/16
More All Messages By This Member
Re: all about guns and safety was Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Matt #26968 Well it is not just technology in general. It is also a blindness issue which is on topic! How blind people uses guns in their life to protect their self! As pure technology goes there is but have not been talked about is finger print deactivate the gun for firing and then there is the scopes that go on them and just the technology of how they work. What is the best for use with a blind person for CCW and what is the best for home security for the blind person. And the list goes on and on! I don't see what the big deal is ? As the thread would die if you let it die or move to the chat room! But you will not let it! Matt.from.florida@gmail.com toggle quoted messageShow quoted text -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 11:30 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Matt, you're not understanding. I'm actually trying to contribute to the discussion by asking what part of guns has to do with technology for me and others to learn from, but all I'm getting is that the subject matter is appropriate for the list. I know that now. At this point, if I get more of the same and no one posts any technology related information, I'm going to assume guns probably don't have much to do with technology. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 8:25 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well guns in general might not be on topic but how they work and so on is and also this list deals with blindness issues as well so guns and blind people using them is on topic but we was going to try to move this to the chat list but you keep bringing up why it is on topic or off topic. If you need a better explanation then I suggest you write Carlos off list to explain it better! Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:57 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident I'm actually making a friendly request for the gun enthusists on the list to help me understand what facet of guns is technology related? This is a friendly request though it may come off as a challenge. Again, I think I might learn something I had not considered in the past. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:36 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Are guns not technology? As you say, just about anything can be considered technology. Anything manufactured for use as a tool qualifies as technology and while I agree that there should be a reasonable common sense line in defining how it relates to the list, it certainly doesn't only apply to computers and electronics even taking that into account. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy" <jeremy.richards7@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:21 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Ok, but just so I learn something, what makes the gun topic tech related? JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Joe Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:17 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hell, can we keep the gun talk on this list for now? One less list to subscribe to, and I think Carlos has the right of it in considering guns as technology. Just my two cents. Joe -- Musings of a Work in Progress: www.JoeOrozco.com/ Twitter: @ScribblingJoe -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 8:26 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Generally electronic and accessible technology is what most members are interested in discussing, but I don't object to other types of technology being discussed within reason. It is a general technology discussion list, not exclusively for discussing computer related technology. However, I expect people to use a bit of common sense. Science provides technology, but it is not technology. We will handle unusual topics on an individual basis, but basically as long as it does not strain the credulity and patience of most members, I am willing to be flexible and open minded. Of course, if a slightly offbeat topic seems to be dragging on for too long or irritating too many members, I may request that we move on at some point. Also, while the majority of members are blind and I will not go out of my way to promote the list in the sighted community, I have no objections to sighted individuals who might wish to subscribe and participate. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy" <jeremy.richards7@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:51 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hi Carlos, In hopes of not stepping on toes, I think you might want to define what is meant by technology as it relates to this list. I don't think most would consider guns technology in terms of the scope of blind members wanting to know about computer sciences and general computing. As is, it appears that just about anything can be considered technology is one thinks about it. Would the study of ants be considered technology if an electronic device is used to watch them at work? Would Woman's make-up be on topic on this list if someone twists him or herself in pretzels to box up a question using a technology slant? I think most list members consider computers and all they do for us as on topic, but seismographs and oscilloscopes might not be as relevant. ...Just looking for a bit more clarity. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 4:12 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Guns are most certainly technology and I personally don't have a problem with the discussion, but I believe some members might not be quite as understanding so we might want to close this topic or move it to the chat list as was suggested. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:42 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well it not just because it a gun thread if it was about guns and the technology that could be implemted on them then it would be on topic. But just guns in general no . or if it is abut guns and blindness it would be on topic. As carlos is fairly flexable and most anything technology wise or blindness related is on topic . But I have no problem about moving to the chat room. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:31 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It might be time for the chat list as this topic has now morphed into some sort of gun thread. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 10:28 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well this is true on single action revolvers of today and it is still the safety way is to let the hammer set on an empty chamber. Now you could do the same for a double action as well let it set on the empty chamber but you don't have to . As the trigger pull unless modified is usually a fairly heavy pull anyhow. . but the safest way is not to put your finger on the trigger till you are ready to pull it. they really have 4types of revolvers as I know. They are single shot, single action, double action only and DASA (Double action plus single action) another words you can just pull the trigger or you can cock the hammer and pull the trigger. Your choice. Most double action only does not have an external hammer. Now I was brought up with guns and had them around me and learn at every early age about them and how to handle them. But you need to get training on handling them and using them as well as training on the laws and how to protect yourself with them. it is much more than just going out and buying gun. This is just stupid. I not a big fan of most regulation but some I am and some I have no problem with them at all. But I don't know if we are not sort of straying off topic and off the the subject as well so this might need to be moved to the chat room. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of James Bentley Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:00 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You can't even pull the trigger on a single action revolver unless the hammer is cocked back in to the firing position. You never cock the gun unless you intend to discharge it. Most double action revolvers do not have a safety because the gun still needs to be cocked before it can be fired. Or, the necessary trigger travel to discharge the gun is so great that it would be almost impossible to accidentily pull the trigger far enough to shoot the gun. James -----Original Message----- From: Matt Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 11:33 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You can on most all pistols you cannot on revolvers the safety is not to pull the trigger. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Pamela Dominguez Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 10:26 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident I think you can lock the trigger. Pam. -----Original Message----- From: Rajmund Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 6:19 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident My problem with a gun would be, what if I accidently trigger it in my pocket? Or sit on it, or whatever? Knife, cane, spray, they're all good, but I'd be worried with a gun. Sent from a BrailleNote ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Date sent: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 18:12:42 -0400 Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Nothing wrong with pepper spray in certain events but you don't take pepper spray to a gun fight or a knife fight or even a baseball bat fight. If you did you would be on the losing end of the fight for sure! You can have lots of things in your protection tool box! Pepper spray is one of them. But it should not be the only thing. You should have a knife , stun gun or Taser and a gun for sure a good old fashion hickory cane with a good hook to it that is very pointed at the end of the hook is good or asord cane is good. But a water gun is not much good unless you have something besides water in it. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Rajmund Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 4:55 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hi All, Speaking of protection, I'd feel safer with a bottle of pepper spray myself, too. I have worries about guns myself, but the good old pepper spray. Sent from a BrailleNote ----- Original Message ----- From: "Laz" <laz@talkingmp3players.com To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Date sent: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 14:55:52 -0400 Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Gerald, I really hope you're just joking with all this drivel. I know one of these so-called "blind extremists" who carries a gun and he carries it for protection only. The times he has shot it in public was because he was being threatened by four sighted extremist thugs also known as criminals, who were threatening to not only rob him but cause him physical harm. He took out his gun and shot once, straight up into the air. Yes, the extremist thugs quickly ran away in fright and I hope they also needed to do some laundry quickly afterward. Who knows what would have happened to my friend if he hadn't been legally carrying his weapon. But I know I'm wasting my time with telling you that as you're not for the individual and his rights but for some other agenda instead. BTW there are more deaths due to automobile accidents than there are due to shootings so this brings it back around to your glass half full attitude aimed at self-driving cars which have caused how many deaths so far... Laz On 7/1/16, Gerald Levy <bwaylimited@verizon.net> wrote: That's a damn good question. Why, indeed, are some blind extremists allowed to walk around with guns? Oh, excuse me, it's their constitutional right. Never mind that they place the rest of us at risk. It's bad enough that terrorists and sociopaths are allowed to buy and own firearms. But blind consumers as well? No wonder this country is a screwed up mess that has become beholden to dangerous demagogues like Donald Trump. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Carlos Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:45 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It is nonsense because it is simply not possible. And if the lawmakers were so determined to put a halt to any technology that is not 100% safe and foolproof, there are many types of technology we would not have access to in modern society. If the lawmakers in Washington care so much about keeping dangerous technology out of the hands of the blind, then why are there several blind individuals who are still being allowed to legally own firearms? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerald Levy" <bwaylimited@verizon.net To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:38 PM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You may think that making self-driving cars 100% foolproof is nonsense. But you can bet that the lawmakers in Washington and elsewhere won't see it that way. They will demand that self-driving vehicles be made as close to 100% foolproof as possible before they consider enacting legislation that would allow blind drivers to operate them without the accompaniment of a sighted driver. That's just the realities of politics in a predominantly sighted world. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Carlos Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:11 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Who knows when blind people will be allowed to manage these types of cars. Will it be any time soon? Probably not, but there is a difference between soon and never. But as far as I'm concerned, the other issue here is this ridiculous assumption that somehow the technology should be or ever can be made 100% safe and foolproof. That is just nonsense and trying to predict the future of the technology based on one accident or even several is just more nonsense. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:59 PM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well I usually don't or try not to look at things with a half empty blass but a half full one. But in some cases this is just not possible. I have to agree with him on this Gerald . It is also not just the US legislature but from state to state. Just like all driving laws vary from state to state.. It is called states' rights and there forth each state will more than likely implement it on law on driving driverless cars. I also think they would require very special training even for the sited but certainly for the blind person as well! I just don't see the blind being able to do this in my life time and I hope to be here around another 30 years. I am coming up on my 58th birthday. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Gerald Levy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:49 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It really doesn't matter what caused the accident. The bottom line is that it will be a very long time, if ever, before blind consumers are allowed to operate one of these gizmos by themselves. One fatal accident is still one fatal accident too many. These vehicles must be made 100% safe and foolproof before the powers that be in Washington will let blind drivers behind the wheel without the accompaniment of a sighted driver in the passenger's seat. Sorry to throw water on your parade. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:26 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Again, another reflexive post of yours. There's lots of reasons why this could have happened. It is likely these multiple car manufacturers are using different gPS databases and supporting software, as well as other yet to be determined reasons, so what happened here may not happen to other researchers who are using more developed databases--the results depend on lots of variables. The Google car has not had this type of history, and the single accident it had was due to a human disabling the computer and taking over the driving. Gerald, I don't think technology is for you, so you might consider solutions which are less stressful to you. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Gerald Levy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 9:18 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident For those of you who are chomping at the bit to buy one of those newfangled self-driving cars that may some day revolutionize the lives of us blind consumers, not so fast. The race to develop a safe and reliable self-driving vehicle suffered a major setback recently when a Tesla all-electric self-driving car was involved in a fatal accident that killed the driver while it was operating in self-driving mode. I guess it's back to the drawing board: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/business/self-driving-tesla-fat al-crash-investigation.html?_r=0 Gerald -- Affordably priced Accessible Talking MP3 Players, Accessible phones, Bluetooth devices, and accessories http://www.talkingmp3players.com/ Email: laz@talkingmp3players.com Phone: 727-498-0121 Skype: lazmesa Personal Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/laz.mesa Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/Talkingmp3players?_rdr ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7640 / Virus Database: 4613/12537 - Release Date: 07/01/16
More All Messages By This Member
Re: How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll Carlos #26967 Yes I forgot about the need to log in when I created the poll. toggle quoted messageShow quoted text ----- Original Message ----- From: Matt To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 11:29 AM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll Well I think if you did not have to log in it would have been different! Most of us don’t know our password or never had one! Sorry ! Matt.from.florida@... From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:22 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll Sigh I give up. LOL everyone can just post their vote in a reply if it is more convenient. ----- Original Message ----- From: Loy To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:17 AM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll It takes me to the Tech Talk group main page, no options to vote. ----- Original Message ----- From: Carlos To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Saturday, July 2, 2016 10:02 AM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll Interesting. There should be several radio buttons which are the choices and a "Vote" link. ----- Original Message ----- From: Loy To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:00 AM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll I clicked on vote now but did not see any option to vote. ----- Original Message ----- From: Carlos To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Saturday, July 2, 2016 9:49 AM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll LOL click on the Vote Now link and choose an option to make it official. This way everyone can also view the results of the poll. ----- Original Message ----- From: Loy To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 9:45 AM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll I never use narrator. ----- Original Message ----- From: Carlos To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Saturday, July 2, 2016 9:39 AM Subject: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll A new poll has been created: Just for fun and because we rarely use this feature. 1. I only use Narrator for emergencies 2. I never use Narrator 3. I use Narrator regularly Vote Now
More All Messages By This Member
Re: all about guns and safety was Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Jeremy <jeremy.richards7@...> #26966 Matt, you're not understanding. I'm actually trying to contribute to the discussion by asking what part of guns has to do with technology for me and others to learn from, but all I'm getting is that the subject matter is appropriate for the list. I know that now. At this point, if I get more of the same and no one posts any technology related information, I'm going to assume guns probably don't have much to do with technology. JR toggle quoted messageShow quoted text -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 8:25 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well guns in general might not be on topic but how they work and so on is and also this list deals with blindness issues as well so guns and blind people using them is on topic but we was going to try to move this to the chat list but you keep bringing up why it is on topic or off topic. If you need a better explanation then I suggest you write Carlos off list to explain it better! Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:57 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident I'm actually making a friendly request for the gun enthusists on the list to help me understand what facet of guns is technology related? This is a friendly request though it may come off as a challenge. Again, I think I might learn something I had not considered in the past. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:36 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Are guns not technology? As you say, just about anything can be considered technology. Anything manufactured for use as a tool qualifies as technology and while I agree that there should be a reasonable common sense line in defining how it relates to the list, it certainly doesn't only apply to computers and electronics even taking that into account. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy" <jeremy.richards7@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:21 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Ok, but just so I learn something, what makes the gun topic tech related? JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Joe Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:17 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hell, can we keep the gun talk on this list for now? One less list to subscribe to, and I think Carlos has the right of it in considering guns as technology. Just my two cents. Joe -- Musings of a Work in Progress: www.JoeOrozco.com/ Twitter: @ScribblingJoe -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 8:26 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Generally electronic and accessible technology is what most members are interested in discussing, but I don't object to other types of technology being discussed within reason. It is a general technology discussion list, not exclusively for discussing computer related technology. However, I expect people to use a bit of common sense. Science provides technology, but it is not technology. We will handle unusual topics on an individual basis, but basically as long as it does not strain the credulity and patience of most members, I am willing to be flexible and open minded. Of course, if a slightly offbeat topic seems to be dragging on for too long or irritating too many members, I may request that we move on at some point. Also, while the majority of members are blind and I will not go out of my way to promote the list in the sighted community, I have no objections to sighted individuals who might wish to subscribe and participate. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy" <jeremy.richards7@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:51 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hi Carlos, In hopes of not stepping on toes, I think you might want to define what is meant by technology as it relates to this list. I don't think most would consider guns technology in terms of the scope of blind members wanting to know about computer sciences and general computing. As is, it appears that just about anything can be considered technology is one thinks about it. Would the study of ants be considered technology if an electronic device is used to watch them at work? Would Woman's make-up be on topic on this list if someone twists him or herself in pretzels to box up a question using a technology slant? I think most list members consider computers and all they do for us as on topic, but seismographs and oscilloscopes might not be as relevant. ...Just looking for a bit more clarity. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 4:12 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Guns are most certainly technology and I personally don't have a problem with the discussion, but I believe some members might not be quite as understanding so we might want to close this topic or move it to the chat list as was suggested. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:42 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well it not just because it a gun thread if it was about guns and the technology that could be implemted on them then it would be on topic. But just guns in general no . or if it is abut guns and blindness it would be on topic. As carlos is fairly flexable and most anything technology wise or blindness related is on topic . But I have no problem about moving to the chat room. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:31 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It might be time for the chat list as this topic has now morphed into some sort of gun thread. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 10:28 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well this is true on single action revolvers of today and it is still the safety way is to let the hammer set on an empty chamber. Now you could do the same for a double action as well let it set on the empty chamber but you don't have to . As the trigger pull unless modified is usually a fairly heavy pull anyhow. . but the safest way is not to put your finger on the trigger till you are ready to pull it. they really have 4types of revolvers as I know. They are single shot, single action, double action only and DASA (Double action plus single action) another words you can just pull the trigger or you can cock the hammer and pull the trigger. Your choice. Most double action only does not have an external hammer. Now I was brought up with guns and had them around me and learn at every early age about them and how to handle them. But you need to get training on handling them and using them as well as training on the laws and how to protect yourself with them. it is much more than just going out and buying gun. This is just stupid. I not a big fan of most regulation but some I am and some I have no problem with them at all. But I don't know if we are not sort of straying off topic and off the the subject as well so this might need to be moved to the chat room. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of James Bentley Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:00 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You can't even pull the trigger on a single action revolver unless the hammer is cocked back in to the firing position. You never cock the gun unless you intend to discharge it. Most double action revolvers do not have a safety because the gun still needs to be cocked before it can be fired. Or, the necessary trigger travel to discharge the gun is so great that it would be almost impossible to accidentily pull the trigger far enough to shoot the gun. James -----Original Message----- From: Matt Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 11:33 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You can on most all pistols you cannot on revolvers the safety is not to pull the trigger. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Pamela Dominguez Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 10:26 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident I think you can lock the trigger. Pam. -----Original Message----- From: Rajmund Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 6:19 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident My problem with a gun would be, what if I accidently trigger it in my pocket? Or sit on it, or whatever? Knife, cane, spray, they're all good, but I'd be worried with a gun. Sent from a BrailleNote ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Date sent: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 18:12:42 -0400 Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Nothing wrong with pepper spray in certain events but you don't take pepper spray to a gun fight or a knife fight or even a baseball bat fight. If you did you would be on the losing end of the fight for sure! You can have lots of things in your protection tool box! Pepper spray is one of them. But it should not be the only thing. You should have a knife , stun gun or Taser and a gun for sure a good old fashion hickory cane with a good hook to it that is very pointed at the end of the hook is good or asord cane is good. But a water gun is not much good unless you have something besides water in it. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Rajmund Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 4:55 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hi All, Speaking of protection, I'd feel safer with a bottle of pepper spray myself, too. I have worries about guns myself, but the good old pepper spray. Sent from a BrailleNote ----- Original Message ----- From: "Laz" <laz@talkingmp3players.com To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Date sent: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 14:55:52 -0400 Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Gerald, I really hope you're just joking with all this drivel. I know one of these so-called "blind extremists" who carries a gun and he carries it for protection only. The times he has shot it in public was because he was being threatened by four sighted extremist thugs also known as criminals, who were threatening to not only rob him but cause him physical harm. He took out his gun and shot once, straight up into the air. Yes, the extremist thugs quickly ran away in fright and I hope they also needed to do some laundry quickly afterward. Who knows what would have happened to my friend if he hadn't been legally carrying his weapon. But I know I'm wasting my time with telling you that as you're not for the individual and his rights but for some other agenda instead. BTW there are more deaths due to automobile accidents than there are due to shootings so this brings it back around to your glass half full attitude aimed at self-driving cars which have caused how many deaths so far... Laz On 7/1/16, Gerald Levy <bwaylimited@verizon.net> wrote: That's a damn good question. Why, indeed, are some blind extremists allowed to walk around with guns? Oh, excuse me, it's their constitutional right. Never mind that they place the rest of us at risk. It's bad enough that terrorists and sociopaths are allowed to buy and own firearms. But blind consumers as well? No wonder this country is a screwed up mess that has become beholden to dangerous demagogues like Donald Trump. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Carlos Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:45 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It is nonsense because it is simply not possible. And if the lawmakers were so determined to put a halt to any technology that is not 100% safe and foolproof, there are many types of technology we would not have access to in modern society. If the lawmakers in Washington care so much about keeping dangerous technology out of the hands of the blind, then why are there several blind individuals who are still being allowed to legally own firearms? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerald Levy" <bwaylimited@verizon.net To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:38 PM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You may think that making self-driving cars 100% foolproof is nonsense. But you can bet that the lawmakers in Washington and elsewhere won't see it that way. They will demand that self-driving vehicles be made as close to 100% foolproof as possible before they consider enacting legislation that would allow blind drivers to operate them without the accompaniment of a sighted driver. That's just the realities of politics in a predominantly sighted world. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Carlos Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:11 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Who knows when blind people will be allowed to manage these types of cars. Will it be any time soon? Probably not, but there is a difference between soon and never. But as far as I'm concerned, the other issue here is this ridiculous assumption that somehow the technology should be or ever can be made 100% safe and foolproof. That is just nonsense and trying to predict the future of the technology based on one accident or even several is just more nonsense. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:59 PM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well I usually don't or try not to look at things with a half empty blass but a half full one. But in some cases this is just not possible. I have to agree with him on this Gerald . It is also not just the US legislature but from state to state. Just like all driving laws vary from state to state.. It is called states' rights and there forth each state will more than likely implement it on law on driving driverless cars. I also think they would require very special training even for the sited but certainly for the blind person as well! I just don't see the blind being able to do this in my life time and I hope to be here around another 30 years. I am coming up on my 58th birthday. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Gerald Levy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:49 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It really doesn't matter what caused the accident. The bottom line is that it will be a very long time, if ever, before blind consumers are allowed to operate one of these gizmos by themselves. One fatal accident is still one fatal accident too many. These vehicles must be made 100% safe and foolproof before the powers that be in Washington will let blind drivers behind the wheel without the accompaniment of a sighted driver in the passenger's seat. Sorry to throw water on your parade. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:26 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Again, another reflexive post of yours. There's lots of reasons why this could have happened. It is likely these multiple car manufacturers are using different gPS databases and supporting software, as well as other yet to be determined reasons, so what happened here may not happen to other researchers who are using more developed databases--the results depend on lots of variables. The Google car has not had this type of history, and the single accident it had was due to a human disabling the computer and taking over the driving. Gerald, I don't think technology is for you, so you might consider solutions which are less stressful to you. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Gerald Levy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 9:18 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident For those of you who are chomping at the bit to buy one of those newfangled self-driving cars that may some day revolutionize the lives of us blind consumers, not so fast. The race to develop a safe and reliable self-driving vehicle suffered a major setback recently when a Tesla all-electric self-driving car was involved in a fatal accident that killed the driver while it was operating in self-driving mode. I guess it's back to the drawing board: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/business/self-driving-tesla-fat al-crash-investigation.html?_r=0 Gerald -- Affordably priced Accessible Talking MP3 Players, Accessible phones, Bluetooth devices, and accessories http://www.talkingmp3players.com/ Email: laz@talkingmp3players.com Phone: 727-498-0121 Skype: lazmesa Personal Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/laz.mesa Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/Talkingmp3players?_rdr ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7640 / Virus Database: 4613/12537 - Release Date: 07/01/16
More All Messages By This Member
Re: How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll Matt #26965 Well I think if you did not have to log in it would have been different! Most of us don’t know our password or never had one! Sorry ! Matt.from.florida@... toggle quoted messageShow quoted text From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:22 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll Sigh I give up. LOL everyone can just post their vote in a reply if it is more convenient. ----- Original Message ----- From: Loy To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:17 AM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll It takes me to the Tech Talk group main page, no options to vote. ----- Original Message ----- From: Carlos To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Saturday, July 2, 2016 10:02 AM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll Interesting. There should be several radio buttons which are the choices and a "Vote" link. ----- Original Message ----- From: Loy To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:00 AM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll I clicked on vote now but did not see any option to vote. ----- Original Message ----- From: Carlos To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Saturday, July 2, 2016 9:49 AM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll LOL click on the Vote Now link and choose an option to make it official. This way everyone can also view the results of the poll. ----- Original Message ----- From: Loy To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 9:45 AM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll I never use narrator. ----- Original Message ----- From: Carlos To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Saturday, July 2, 2016 9:39 AM Subject: [TechTalk] How frequently do you use the Windows Narrator screen reader? #poll A new poll has been created: Just for fun and because we rarely use this feature. 1. I only use Narrator for emergencies 2. I never use Narrator 3. I use Narrator regularly Vote Now
More All Messages By This Member
Re: definition for , technology, was, all about guns and safety was Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Matt #26964 Why are you making such a big deal of this? you seem to be the only one! This list as Carlos has told you is fairly flexible and this is why it is such a great list! Matt.from.florida@gmail.com toggle quoted messageShow quoted text -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of James Bentley Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 11:10 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: definition for , technology, was, all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident tech·nol·o·gy /tekˈnäləjē/ noun noun: technology; plural noun: technologies the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes, especially in industry. "advances in computer technology" •machinery and equipment developed from the application of scientific knowledge. •the branch of knowledge dealing with engineering or applied sciences. -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 9:57 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident I'm actually making a friendly request for the gun enthusists on the list to help me understand what facet of guns is technology related? This is a friendly request though it may come off as a challenge. Again, I think I might learn something I had not considered in the past. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:36 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Are guns not technology? As you say, just about anything can be considered technology. Anything manufactured for use as a tool qualifies as technology and while I agree that there should be a reasonable common sense line in defining how it relates to the list, it certainly doesn't only apply to computers and electronics even taking that into account. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy" <jeremy.richards7@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:21 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Ok, but just so I learn something, what makes the gun topic tech related? JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Joe Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:17 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hell, can we keep the gun talk on this list for now? One less list to subscribe to, and I think Carlos has the right of it in considering guns as technology. Just my two cents. Joe -- Musings of a Work in Progress: www.JoeOrozco.com/ Twitter: @ScribblingJoe -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 8:26 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Generally electronic and accessible technology is what most members are interested in discussing, but I don't object to other types of technology being discussed within reason. It is a general technology discussion list, not exclusively for discussing computer related technology. However, I expect people to use a bit of common sense. Science provides technology, but it is not technology. We will handle unusual topics on an individual basis, but basically as long as it does not strain the credulity and patience of most members, I am willing to be flexible and open minded. Of course, if a slightly offbeat topic seems to be dragging on for too long or irritating too many members, I may request that we move on at some point. Also, while the majority of members are blind and I will not go out of my way to promote the list in the sighted community, I have no objections to sighted individuals who might wish to subscribe and participate. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy" <jeremy.richards7@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:51 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hi Carlos, In hopes of not stepping on toes, I think you might want to define what is meant by technology as it relates to this list. I don't think most would consider guns technology in terms of the scope of blind members wanting to know about computer sciences and general computing. As is, it appears that just about anything can be considered technology is one thinks about it. Would the study of ants be considered technology if an electronic device is used to watch them at work? Would Woman's make-up be on topic on this list if someone twists him or herself in pretzels to box up a question using a technology slant? I think most list members consider computers and all they do for us as on topic, but seismographs and oscilloscopes might not be as relevant. ...Just looking for a bit more clarity. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 4:12 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Guns are most certainly technology and I personally don't have a problem with the discussion, but I believe some members might not be quite as understanding so we might want to close this topic or move it to the chat list as was suggested. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:42 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well it not just because it a gun thread if it was about guns and the technology that could be implemted on them then it would be on topic. But just guns in general no . or if it is abut guns and blindness it would be on topic. As carlos is fairly flexable and most anything technology wise or blindness related is on topic . But I have no problem about moving to the chat room. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:31 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It might be time for the chat list as this topic has now morphed into some sort of gun thread. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 10:28 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well this is true on single action revolvers of today and it is still the safety way is to let the hammer set on an empty chamber. Now you could do the same for a double action as well let it set on the empty chamber but you don't have to . As the trigger pull unless modified is usually a fairly heavy pull anyhow. . but the safest way is not to put your finger on the trigger till you are ready to pull it. they really have 4types of revolvers as I know. They are single shot, single action, double action only and DASA (Double action plus single action) another words you can just pull the trigger or you can cock the hammer and pull the trigger. Your choice. Most double action only does not have an external hammer. Now I was brought up with guns and had them around me and learn at every early age about them and how to handle them. But you need to get training on handling them and using them as well as training on the laws and how to protect yourself with them. it is much more than just going out and buying gun. This is just stupid. I not a big fan of most regulation but some I am and some I have no problem with them at all. But I don't know if we are not sort of straying off topic and off the the subject as well so this might need to be moved to the chat room. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of James Bentley Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:00 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You can't even pull the trigger on a single action revolver unless the hammer is cocked back in to the firing position. You never cock the gun unless you intend to discharge it. Most double action revolvers do not have a safety because the gun still needs to be cocked before it can be fired. Or, the necessary trigger travel to discharge the gun is so great that it would be almost impossible to accidentily pull the trigger far enough to shoot the gun. James -----Original Message----- From: Matt Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 11:33 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You can on most all pistols you cannot on revolvers the safety is not to pull the trigger. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Pamela Dominguez Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 10:26 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident I think you can lock the trigger. Pam. -----Original Message----- From: Rajmund Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 6:19 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident My problem with a gun would be, what if I accidently trigger it in my pocket? Or sit on it, or whatever? Knife, cane, spray, they're all good, but I'd be worried with a gun. Sent from a BrailleNote ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Date sent: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 18:12:42 -0400 Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Nothing wrong with pepper spray in certain events but you don't take pepper spray to a gun fight or a knife fight or even a baseball bat fight. If you did you would be on the losing end of the fight for sure! You can have lots of things in your protection tool box! Pepper spray is one of them. But it should not be the only thing. You should have a knife , stun gun or Taser and a gun for sure a good old fashion hickory cane with a good hook to it that is very pointed at the end of the hook is good or asord cane is good. But a water gun is not much good unless you have something besides water in it. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Rajmund Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 4:55 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hi All, Speaking of protection, I'd feel safer with a bottle of pepper spray myself, too. I have worries about guns myself, but the good old pepper spray. Sent from a BrailleNote ----- Original Message ----- From: "Laz" <laz@talkingmp3players.com To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Date sent: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 14:55:52 -0400 Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Gerald, I really hope you're just joking with all this drivel. I know one of these so-called "blind extremists" who carries a gun and he carries it for protection only. The times he has shot it in public was because he was being threatened by four sighted extremist thugs also known as criminals, who were threatening to not only rob him but cause him physical harm. He took out his gun and shot once, straight up into the air. Yes, the extremist thugs quickly ran away in fright and I hope they also needed to do some laundry quickly afterward. Who knows what would have happened to my friend if he hadn't been legally carrying his weapon. But I know I'm wasting my time with telling you that as you're not for the individual and his rights but for some other agenda instead. BTW there are more deaths due to automobile accidents than there are due to shootings so this brings it back around to your glass half full attitude aimed at self-driving cars which have caused how many deaths so far... Laz On 7/1/16, Gerald Levy <bwaylimited@verizon.net> wrote: That's a damn good question. Why, indeed, are some blind extremists allowed to walk around with guns? Oh, excuse me, it's their constitutional right. Never mind that they place the rest of us at risk. It's bad enough that terrorists and sociopaths are allowed to buy and own firearms. But blind consumers as well? No wonder this country is a screwed up mess that has become beholden to dangerous demagogues like Donald Trump. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Carlos Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:45 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It is nonsense because it is simply not possible. And if the lawmakers were so determined to put a halt to any technology that is not 100% safe and foolproof, there are many types of technology we would not have access to in modern society. If the lawmakers in Washington care so much about keeping dangerous technology out of the hands of the blind, then why are there several blind individuals who are still being allowed to legally own firearms? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerald Levy" <bwaylimited@verizon.net To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:38 PM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You may think that making self-driving cars 100% foolproof is nonsense. But you can bet that the lawmakers in Washington and elsewhere won't see it that way. They will demand that self-driving vehicles be made as close to 100% foolproof as possible before they consider enacting legislation that would allow blind drivers to operate them without the accompaniment of a sighted driver. That's just the realities of politics in a predominantly sighted world. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Carlos Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:11 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Who knows when blind people will be allowed to manage these types of cars. Will it be any time soon? Probably not, but there is a difference between soon and never. But as far as I'm concerned, the other issue here is this ridiculous assumption that somehow the technology should be or ever can be made 100% safe and foolproof. That is just nonsense and trying to predict the future of the technology based on one accident or even several is just more nonsense. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:59 PM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well I usually don't or try not to look at things with a half empty blass but a half full one. But in some cases this is just not possible. I have to agree with him on this Gerald . It is also not just the US legislature but from state to state. Just like all driving laws vary from state to state.. It is called states' rights and there forth each state will more than likely implement it on law on driving driverless cars. I also think they would require very special training even for the sited but certainly for the blind person as well! I just don't see the blind being able to do this in my life time and I hope to be here around another 30 years. I am coming up on my 58th birthday. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Gerald Levy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:49 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It really doesn't matter what caused the accident. The bottom line is that it will be a very long time, if ever, before blind consumers are allowed to operate one of these gizmos by themselves. One fatal accident is still one fatal accident too many. These vehicles must be made 100% safe and foolproof before the powers that be in Washington will let blind drivers behind the wheel without the accompaniment of a sighted driver in the passenger's seat. Sorry to throw water on your parade. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:26 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Again, another reflexive post of yours. There's lots of reasons why this could have happened. It is likely these multiple car manufacturers are using different gPS databases and supporting software, as well as other yet to be determined reasons, so what happened here may not happen to other researchers who are using more developed databases--the results depend on lots of variables. The Google car has not had this type of history, and the single accident it had was due to a human disabling the computer and taking over the driving. Gerald, I don't think technology is for you, so you might consider solutions which are less stressful to you. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Gerald Levy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 9:18 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident For those of you who are chomping at the bit to buy one of those newfangled self-driving cars that may some day revolutionize the lives of us blind consumers, not so fast. The race to develop a safe and reliable self-driving vehicle suffered a major setback recently when a Tesla all-electric self-driving car was involved in a fatal accident that killed the driver while it was operating in self-driving mode. I guess it's back to the drawing board: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/business/self-driving-tesla-fat al-crash-investigation.html?_r=0 Gerald -- Affordably priced Accessible Talking MP3 Players, Accessible phones, Bluetooth devices, and accessories http://www.talkingmp3players.com/ Email: laz@talkingmp3players.com Phone: 727-498-0121 Skype: lazmesa Personal Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/laz.mesa Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/Talkingmp3players?_rdr ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7640 / Virus Database: 4613/12537 - Release Date: 07/01/16
More All Messages By This Member
Re: all about guns and safety was Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Matt #26963 Well guns in general might not be on topic but how they work and so on is and also this list deals with blindness issues as well so guns and blind people using them is on topic but we was going to try to move this to the chat list but you keep bringing up why it is on topic or off topic. If you need a better explanation then I suggest you write Carlos off list to explain it better! Matt.from.florida@gmail.com toggle quoted messageShow quoted text -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:57 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident I'm actually making a friendly request for the gun enthusists on the list to help me understand what facet of guns is technology related? This is a friendly request though it may come off as a challenge. Again, I think I might learn something I had not considered in the past. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:36 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Are guns not technology? As you say, just about anything can be considered technology. Anything manufactured for use as a tool qualifies as technology and while I agree that there should be a reasonable common sense line in defining how it relates to the list, it certainly doesn't only apply to computers and electronics even taking that into account. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy" <jeremy.richards7@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:21 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Ok, but just so I learn something, what makes the gun topic tech related? JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Joe Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:17 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hell, can we keep the gun talk on this list for now? One less list to subscribe to, and I think Carlos has the right of it in considering guns as technology. Just my two cents. Joe -- Musings of a Work in Progress: www.JoeOrozco.com/ Twitter: @ScribblingJoe -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 8:26 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Generally electronic and accessible technology is what most members are interested in discussing, but I don't object to other types of technology being discussed within reason. It is a general technology discussion list, not exclusively for discussing computer related technology. However, I expect people to use a bit of common sense. Science provides technology, but it is not technology. We will handle unusual topics on an individual basis, but basically as long as it does not strain the credulity and patience of most members, I am willing to be flexible and open minded. Of course, if a slightly offbeat topic seems to be dragging on for too long or irritating too many members, I may request that we move on at some point. Also, while the majority of members are blind and I will not go out of my way to promote the list in the sighted community, I have no objections to sighted individuals who might wish to subscribe and participate. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy" <jeremy.richards7@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:51 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hi Carlos, In hopes of not stepping on toes, I think you might want to define what is meant by technology as it relates to this list. I don't think most would consider guns technology in terms of the scope of blind members wanting to know about computer sciences and general computing. As is, it appears that just about anything can be considered technology is one thinks about it. Would the study of ants be considered technology if an electronic device is used to watch them at work? Would Woman's make-up be on topic on this list if someone twists him or herself in pretzels to box up a question using a technology slant? I think most list members consider computers and all they do for us as on topic, but seismographs and oscilloscopes might not be as relevant. ...Just looking for a bit more clarity. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 4:12 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Guns are most certainly technology and I personally don't have a problem with the discussion, but I believe some members might not be quite as understanding so we might want to close this topic or move it to the chat list as was suggested. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:42 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well it not just because it a gun thread if it was about guns and the technology that could be implemted on them then it would be on topic. But just guns in general no . or if it is abut guns and blindness it would be on topic. As carlos is fairly flexable and most anything technology wise or blindness related is on topic . But I have no problem about moving to the chat room. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:31 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It might be time for the chat list as this topic has now morphed into some sort of gun thread. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 10:28 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well this is true on single action revolvers of today and it is still the safety way is to let the hammer set on an empty chamber. Now you could do the same for a double action as well let it set on the empty chamber but you don't have to . As the trigger pull unless modified is usually a fairly heavy pull anyhow. . but the safest way is not to put your finger on the trigger till you are ready to pull it. they really have 4types of revolvers as I know. They are single shot, single action, double action only and DASA (Double action plus single action) another words you can just pull the trigger or you can cock the hammer and pull the trigger. Your choice. Most double action only does not have an external hammer. Now I was brought up with guns and had them around me and learn at every early age about them and how to handle them. But you need to get training on handling them and using them as well as training on the laws and how to protect yourself with them. it is much more than just going out and buying gun. This is just stupid. I not a big fan of most regulation but some I am and some I have no problem with them at all. But I don't know if we are not sort of straying off topic and off the the subject as well so this might need to be moved to the chat room. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of James Bentley Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:00 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You can't even pull the trigger on a single action revolver unless the hammer is cocked back in to the firing position. You never cock the gun unless you intend to discharge it. Most double action revolvers do not have a safety because the gun still needs to be cocked before it can be fired. Or, the necessary trigger travel to discharge the gun is so great that it would be almost impossible to accidentily pull the trigger far enough to shoot the gun. James -----Original Message----- From: Matt Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 11:33 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You can on most all pistols you cannot on revolvers the safety is not to pull the trigger. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Pamela Dominguez Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 10:26 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident I think you can lock the trigger. Pam. -----Original Message----- From: Rajmund Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 6:19 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident My problem with a gun would be, what if I accidently trigger it in my pocket? Or sit on it, or whatever? Knife, cane, spray, they're all good, but I'd be worried with a gun. Sent from a BrailleNote ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Date sent: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 18:12:42 -0400 Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Nothing wrong with pepper spray in certain events but you don't take pepper spray to a gun fight or a knife fight or even a baseball bat fight. If you did you would be on the losing end of the fight for sure! You can have lots of things in your protection tool box! Pepper spray is one of them. But it should not be the only thing. You should have a knife , stun gun or Taser and a gun for sure a good old fashion hickory cane with a good hook to it that is very pointed at the end of the hook is good or asord cane is good. But a water gun is not much good unless you have something besides water in it. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Rajmund Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 4:55 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hi All, Speaking of protection, I'd feel safer with a bottle of pepper spray myself, too. I have worries about guns myself, but the good old pepper spray. Sent from a BrailleNote ----- Original Message ----- From: "Laz" <laz@talkingmp3players.com To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Date sent: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 14:55:52 -0400 Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Gerald, I really hope you're just joking with all this drivel. I know one of these so-called "blind extremists" who carries a gun and he carries it for protection only. The times he has shot it in public was because he was being threatened by four sighted extremist thugs also known as criminals, who were threatening to not only rob him but cause him physical harm. He took out his gun and shot once, straight up into the air. Yes, the extremist thugs quickly ran away in fright and I hope they also needed to do some laundry quickly afterward. Who knows what would have happened to my friend if he hadn't been legally carrying his weapon. But I know I'm wasting my time with telling you that as you're not for the individual and his rights but for some other agenda instead. BTW there are more deaths due to automobile accidents than there are due to shootings so this brings it back around to your glass half full attitude aimed at self-driving cars which have caused how many deaths so far... Laz On 7/1/16, Gerald Levy <bwaylimited@verizon.net> wrote: That's a damn good question. Why, indeed, are some blind extremists allowed to walk around with guns? Oh, excuse me, it's their constitutional right. Never mind that they place the rest of us at risk. It's bad enough that terrorists and sociopaths are allowed to buy and own firearms. But blind consumers as well? No wonder this country is a screwed up mess that has become beholden to dangerous demagogues like Donald Trump. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Carlos Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:45 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It is nonsense because it is simply not possible. And if the lawmakers were so determined to put a halt to any technology that is not 100% safe and foolproof, there are many types of technology we would not have access to in modern society. If the lawmakers in Washington care so much about keeping dangerous technology out of the hands of the blind, then why are there several blind individuals who are still being allowed to legally own firearms? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerald Levy" <bwaylimited@verizon.net To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:38 PM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You may think that making self-driving cars 100% foolproof is nonsense. But you can bet that the lawmakers in Washington and elsewhere won't see it that way. They will demand that self-driving vehicles be made as close to 100% foolproof as possible before they consider enacting legislation that would allow blind drivers to operate them without the accompaniment of a sighted driver. That's just the realities of politics in a predominantly sighted world. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Carlos Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:11 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Who knows when blind people will be allowed to manage these types of cars. Will it be any time soon? Probably not, but there is a difference between soon and never. But as far as I'm concerned, the other issue here is this ridiculous assumption that somehow the technology should be or ever can be made 100% safe and foolproof. That is just nonsense and trying to predict the future of the technology based on one accident or even several is just more nonsense. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:59 PM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well I usually don't or try not to look at things with a half empty blass but a half full one. But in some cases this is just not possible. I have to agree with him on this Gerald . It is also not just the US legislature but from state to state. Just like all driving laws vary from state to state.. It is called states' rights and there forth each state will more than likely implement it on law on driving driverless cars. I also think they would require very special training even for the sited but certainly for the blind person as well! I just don't see the blind being able to do this in my life time and I hope to be here around another 30 years. I am coming up on my 58th birthday. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Gerald Levy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:49 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It really doesn't matter what caused the accident. The bottom line is that it will be a very long time, if ever, before blind consumers are allowed to operate one of these gizmos by themselves. One fatal accident is still one fatal accident too many. These vehicles must be made 100% safe and foolproof before the powers that be in Washington will let blind drivers behind the wheel without the accompaniment of a sighted driver in the passenger's seat. Sorry to throw water on your parade. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:26 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Again, another reflexive post of yours. There's lots of reasons why this could have happened. It is likely these multiple car manufacturers are using different gPS databases and supporting software, as well as other yet to be determined reasons, so what happened here may not happen to other researchers who are using more developed databases--the results depend on lots of variables. The Google car has not had this type of history, and the single accident it had was due to a human disabling the computer and taking over the driving. Gerald, I don't think technology is for you, so you might consider solutions which are less stressful to you. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Gerald Levy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 9:18 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident For those of you who are chomping at the bit to buy one of those newfangled self-driving cars that may some day revolutionize the lives of us blind consumers, not so fast. The race to develop a safe and reliable self-driving vehicle suffered a major setback recently when a Tesla all-electric self-driving car was involved in a fatal accident that killed the driver while it was operating in self-driving mode. I guess it's back to the drawing board: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/business/self-driving-tesla-fat al-crash-investigation.html?_r=0 Gerald -- Affordably priced Accessible Talking MP3 Players, Accessible phones, Bluetooth devices, and accessories http://www.talkingmp3players.com/ Email: laz@talkingmp3players.com Phone: 727-498-0121 Skype: lazmesa Personal Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/laz.mesa Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/Talkingmp3players?_rdr ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7640 / Virus Database: 4613/12537 - Release Date: 07/01/16
More All Messages By This Member
definition for , technology, was, all about guns and safety was Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident James Bentley #26962 tech·nol·o·gy /tekˈnäləjē/ noun noun: technology; plural noun: technologies the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes, especially in industry. "advances in computer technology" •machinery and equipment developed from the application of scientific knowledge. •the branch of knowledge dealing with engineering or applied sciences. toggle quoted messageShow quoted text -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 9:57 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident I'm actually making a friendly request for the gun enthusists on the list to help me understand what facet of guns is technology related? This is a friendly request though it may come off as a challenge. Again, I think I might learn something I had not considered in the past. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:36 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Are guns not technology? As you say, just about anything can be considered technology. Anything manufactured for use as a tool qualifies as technology and while I agree that there should be a reasonable common sense line in defining how it relates to the list, it certainly doesn't only apply to computers and electronics even taking that into account. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy" <jeremy.richards7@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 10:21 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Ok, but just so I learn something, what makes the gun topic tech related? JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Joe Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:17 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hell, can we keep the gun talk on this list for now? One less list to subscribe to, and I think Carlos has the right of it in considering guns as technology. Just my two cents. Joe -- Musings of a Work in Progress: www.JoeOrozco.com/ Twitter: @ScribblingJoe -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 8:26 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Generally electronic and accessible technology is what most members are interested in discussing, but I don't object to other types of technology being discussed within reason. It is a general technology discussion list, not exclusively for discussing computer related technology. However, I expect people to use a bit of common sense. Science provides technology, but it is not technology. We will handle unusual topics on an individual basis, but basically as long as it does not strain the credulity and patience of most members, I am willing to be flexible and open minded. Of course, if a slightly offbeat topic seems to be dragging on for too long or irritating too many members, I may request that we move on at some point. Also, while the majority of members are blind and I will not go out of my way to promote the list in the sighted community, I have no objections to sighted individuals who might wish to subscribe and participate. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy" <jeremy.richards7@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 7:51 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hi Carlos, In hopes of not stepping on toes, I think you might want to define what is meant by technology as it relates to this list. I don't think most would consider guns technology in terms of the scope of blind members wanting to know about computer sciences and general computing. As is, it appears that just about anything can be considered technology is one thinks about it. Would the study of ants be considered technology if an electronic device is used to watch them at work? Would Woman's make-up be on topic on this list if someone twists him or herself in pretzels to box up a question using a technology slant? I think most list members consider computers and all they do for us as on topic, but seismographs and oscilloscopes might not be as relevant. ...Just looking for a bit more clarity. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Carlos Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 4:12 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Guns are most certainly technology and I personally don't have a problem with the discussion, but I believe some members might not be quite as understanding so we might want to close this topic or move it to the chat list as was suggested. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com> To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:42 AM Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well it not just because it a gun thread if it was about guns and the technology that could be implemted on them then it would be on topic. But just guns in general no . or if it is abut guns and blindness it would be on topic. As carlos is fairly flexable and most anything technology wise or blindness related is on topic . But I have no problem about moving to the chat room. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Jeremy Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:31 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It might be time for the chat list as this topic has now morphed into some sort of gun thread. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 10:28 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: all about guns and safety was [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well this is true on single action revolvers of today and it is still the safety way is to let the hammer set on an empty chamber. Now you could do the same for a double action as well let it set on the empty chamber but you don't have to . As the trigger pull unless modified is usually a fairly heavy pull anyhow. . but the safest way is not to put your finger on the trigger till you are ready to pull it. they really have 4types of revolvers as I know. They are single shot, single action, double action only and DASA (Double action plus single action) another words you can just pull the trigger or you can cock the hammer and pull the trigger. Your choice. Most double action only does not have an external hammer. Now I was brought up with guns and had them around me and learn at every early age about them and how to handle them. But you need to get training on handling them and using them as well as training on the laws and how to protect yourself with them. it is much more than just going out and buying gun. This is just stupid. I not a big fan of most regulation but some I am and some I have no problem with them at all. But I don't know if we are not sort of straying off topic and off the the subject as well so this might need to be moved to the chat room. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of James Bentley Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 1:00 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You can't even pull the trigger on a single action revolver unless the hammer is cocked back in to the firing position. You never cock the gun unless you intend to discharge it. Most double action revolvers do not have a safety because the gun still needs to be cocked before it can be fired. Or, the necessary trigger travel to discharge the gun is so great that it would be almost impossible to accidentily pull the trigger far enough to shoot the gun. James -----Original Message----- From: Matt Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 11:33 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You can on most all pistols you cannot on revolvers the safety is not to pull the trigger. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Pamela Dominguez Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 10:26 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident I think you can lock the trigger. Pam. -----Original Message----- From: Rajmund Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 6:19 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident My problem with a gun would be, what if I accidently trigger it in my pocket? Or sit on it, or whatever? Knife, cane, spray, they're all good, but I'd be worried with a gun. Sent from a BrailleNote ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Date sent: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 18:12:42 -0400 Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Nothing wrong with pepper spray in certain events but you don't take pepper spray to a gun fight or a knife fight or even a baseball bat fight. If you did you would be on the losing end of the fight for sure! You can have lots of things in your protection tool box! Pepper spray is one of them. But it should not be the only thing. You should have a knife , stun gun or Taser and a gun for sure a good old fashion hickory cane with a good hook to it that is very pointed at the end of the hook is good or asord cane is good. But a water gun is not much good unless you have something besides water in it. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Rajmund Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 4:55 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Hi All, Speaking of protection, I'd feel safer with a bottle of pepper spray myself, too. I have worries about guns myself, but the good old pepper spray. Sent from a BrailleNote ----- Original Message ----- From: "Laz" <laz@talkingmp3players.com To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Date sent: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 14:55:52 -0400 Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Gerald, I really hope you're just joking with all this drivel. I know one of these so-called "blind extremists" who carries a gun and he carries it for protection only. The times he has shot it in public was because he was being threatened by four sighted extremist thugs also known as criminals, who were threatening to not only rob him but cause him physical harm. He took out his gun and shot once, straight up into the air. Yes, the extremist thugs quickly ran away in fright and I hope they also needed to do some laundry quickly afterward. Who knows what would have happened to my friend if he hadn't been legally carrying his weapon. But I know I'm wasting my time with telling you that as you're not for the individual and his rights but for some other agenda instead. BTW there are more deaths due to automobile accidents than there are due to shootings so this brings it back around to your glass half full attitude aimed at self-driving cars which have caused how many deaths so far... Laz On 7/1/16, Gerald Levy <bwaylimited@verizon.net> wrote: That's a damn good question. Why, indeed, are some blind extremists allowed to walk around with guns? Oh, excuse me, it's their constitutional right. Never mind that they place the rest of us at risk. It's bad enough that terrorists and sociopaths are allowed to buy and own firearms. But blind consumers as well? No wonder this country is a screwed up mess that has become beholden to dangerous demagogues like Donald Trump. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Carlos Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:45 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It is nonsense because it is simply not possible. And if the lawmakers were so determined to put a halt to any technology that is not 100% safe and foolproof, there are many types of technology we would not have access to in modern society. If the lawmakers in Washington care so much about keeping dangerous technology out of the hands of the blind, then why are there several blind individuals who are still being allowed to legally own firearms? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerald Levy" <bwaylimited@verizon.net To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:38 PM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident You may think that making self-driving cars 100% foolproof is nonsense. But you can bet that the lawmakers in Washington and elsewhere won't see it that way. They will demand that self-driving vehicles be made as close to 100% foolproof as possible before they consider enacting legislation that would allow blind drivers to operate them without the accompaniment of a sighted driver. That's just the realities of politics in a predominantly sighted world. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Carlos Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 1:11 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Who knows when blind people will be allowed to manage these types of cars. Will it be any time soon? Probably not, but there is a difference between soon and never. But as far as I'm concerned, the other issue here is this ridiculous assumption that somehow the technology should be or ever can be made 100% safe and foolproof. That is just nonsense and trying to predict the future of the technology based on one accident or even several is just more nonsense. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt" <matt.from.florida@gmail.com To: <main@TechTalk.groups.io Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:59 PM Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Well I usually don't or try not to look at things with a half empty blass but a half full one. But in some cases this is just not possible. I have to agree with him on this Gerald . It is also not just the US legislature but from state to state. Just like all driving laws vary from state to state.. It is called states' rights and there forth each state will more than likely implement it on law on driving driverless cars. I also think they would require very special training even for the sited but certainly for the blind person as well! I just don't see the blind being able to do this in my life time and I hope to be here around another 30 years. I am coming up on my 58th birthday. Matt.from.florida@gmail.com -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Gerald Levy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:49 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident It really doesn't matter what caused the accident. The bottom line is that it will be a very long time, if ever, before blind consumers are allowed to operate one of these gizmos by themselves. One fatal accident is still one fatal accident too many. These vehicles must be made 100% safe and foolproof before the powers that be in Washington will let blind drivers behind the wheel without the accompaniment of a sighted driver in the passenger's seat. Sorry to throw water on your parade. Gerald -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 12:26 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident Again, another reflexive post of yours. There's lots of reasons why this could have happened. It is likely these multiple car manufacturers are using different gPS databases and supporting software, as well as other yet to be determined reasons, so what happened here may not happen to other researchers who are using more developed databases--the results depend on lots of variables. The Google car has not had this type of history, and the single accident it had was due to a human disabling the computer and taking over the driving. Gerald, I don't think technology is for you, so you might consider solutions which are less stressful to you. JR -----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of Gerald Levy Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 9:18 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: [TechTalk] Self-Driving Car Involved In Fatal Accident For those of you who are chomping at the bit to buy one of those newfangled self-driving cars that may some day revolutionize the lives of us blind consumers, not so fast. The race to develop a safe and reliable self-driving vehicle suffered a major setback recently when a Tesla all-electric self-driving car was involved in a fatal accident that killed the driver while it was operating in self-driving mode. I guess it's back to the drawing board: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/business/self-driving-tesla-fat al-crash-investigation.html?_r=0 Gerald -- Affordably priced Accessible Talking MP3 Players, Accessible phones, Bluetooth devices, and accessories http://www.talkingmp3players.com/ Email: laz@talkingmp3players.com Phone: 727-498-0121 Skype: lazmesa Personal Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/laz.mesa Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/Talkingmp3players?_rdr ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7640 / Virus Database: 4613/12537 - Release Date: 07/01/16
More All Messages By This Member

79041 - 79060 of 105839

Home Hashtags Subgroups Wiki About Features Pricing Updates Terms Help Twitter