1. Pulling a piece of paper out of a box.
I never used to have an issue doing this, but these days I spend an inordinate amount of time waving my hand in front of a sensor trying to get a paper towel. I would not expect this to be an unsolved challenge in 2015...
Clear cell phone reception, even in rural areas.
Whooping cough. Vaccine has been cheap for decades.
Quote from: empirestate on April 15, 2015, 05:39:09 PM
1. Pulling a piece of paper out of a box.
I never used to have an issue doing this, but these days I spend an inordinate amount of time waving my hand in front of a sensor trying to get a paper towel. I would not expect this to be an unsolved challenge in 2015...
That's a manual dispenser you've got there.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 15, 2015, 07:26:59 PM
Quote from: empirestate on April 15, 2015, 05:39:09 PM
1. Pulling a piece of paper out of a box.
I never used to have an issue doing this, but these days I spend an inordinate amount of time waving my hand in front of a sensor trying to get a paper towel. I would not expect this to be an unsolved challenge in 2015...
That's a manual dispenser you've got there.
Manual dispensers don't have sensors...
Quote from: empirestate on April 15, 2015, 07:41:07 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 15, 2015, 07:26:59 PM
Quote from: empirestate on April 15, 2015, 05:39:09 PM
1. Pulling a piece of paper out of a box.
I never used to have an issue doing this, but these days I spend an inordinate amount of time waving my hand in front of a sensor trying to get a paper towel. I would not expect this to be an unsolved challenge in 2015...
That's a manual dispenser you've got there.
Manual dispensers don't have sensors...
There's a new model of hand dryer out there that has almost exactly the size and shape of a towel dispenser with little or no explanation that it's
not a towel dispenser. I get the feeling it's made that way as an easy retrofit for dispensers of individual-sheet towels, but for god's sake, why can't I just know what's going to happen when I put my hands under something?
4. The vast majority of cars still need gasoline. It should be mostly or all electric by now.
We're still using rockets.
Rick
5. Tomorrow's weather forecast.
Global warming.
6. Garbage storage.
Although rigid containers exist that can be used for the storage of household refuse when it is placed for collection, in my city they insist on using soft plastic bags that are easily ripped open by animals, scavengers and snowplows, with the result that any given neighborhood is constantly strewn with garbage that we have the technology to contain.
iPhone
Quote from: empirestate on April 15, 2015, 11:23:44 PM
6. Garbage storage.
Although rigid containers exist that can be used for the storage of household refuse when it is placed for collection, in my city they insist on using soft plastic bags that are easily ripped open by animals, scavengers and snowplows, with the result that any given neighborhood is constantly strewn with garbage that we have the technology to contain.
As you point out, technology has solved this. Your city is ignoring this fact.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 15, 2015, 11:52:47 PM
Quote from: empirestate on April 15, 2015, 11:23:44 PM
6. Garbage storage.
Although rigid containers exist that can be used for the storage of household refuse when it is placed for collection, in my city they insist on using soft plastic bags that are easily ripped open by animals, scavengers and snowplows, with the result that any given neighborhood is constantly strewn with garbage that we have the technology to contain.
As you point out, technology has solved this. Your city is ignoring this fact.
Perhaps not the situation the phrase "not invented here" normally describes, but it seems quite appropriate.
I am a little surprised that we don't have some sort of permanent fix for tooth decay that would eliminate the need to brush.
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 16, 2015, 05:12:28 AM
I am a little surprised that we don't have some sort of permanent fix for tooth decay that would eliminate the need to brush.
We do. It's called false teeth.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 15, 2015, 11:52:47 PM
Quote from: empirestate on April 15, 2015, 11:23:44 PM
6. Garbage storage.
Although rigid containers exist that can be used for the storage of household refuse when it is placed for collection, in my city they insist on using soft plastic bags that are easily ripped open by animals, scavengers and snowplows, with the result that any given neighborhood is constantly strewn with garbage that we have the technology to contain.
As you point out, technology has solved this. Your city is ignoring this fact.
Right, so it's not solved. The technology has to be applied in order for the problem to go away.
The travelling salesman problem
Highway signs that look like crap
Quote from: 1 on April 15, 2015, 08:11:43 PM
4. The vast majority of cars still need gasoline. It should be mostly or all electric by now.
Their propulsive energy still has to come from somewhere and the ability to store that energy was a late-19th century *fail* - and things relating to that haven't progressed much since then.
Mike
Quote from: Carl Miller on April 16, 2015, 09:58:46 AM
Highway signs that look like crap
The need for highway signs.
Capitalism.
It's 2015! Where are our Hoverboards!
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvignette1.wikia.nocookie.net%2Fbttf%2Fimages%2F1%2F1d%2FMattel_Hoverboard.png%2Frevision%2Flatest%3Fcb%3D20110924125321&hash=7e0ba112484341090c095aa2fef63717c00d4544)
Quote from: OCGuy81 on April 16, 2015, 11:30:59 AM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvignette1.wikia.nocookie.net%2Fbttf%2Fimages%2F1%2F1d%2FMattel_Hoverboard.png%2Frevision%2Flatest%3Fcb%3D20110924125321&hash=7e0ba112484341090c095aa2fef63717c00d4544)
Fixed the aspect ratio for you...
Quote from: NE2 on April 16, 2015, 11:15:26 AM
Capitalism.
Problem or no, this is an issue of human behavior, not technology.
Quote from: vtk on April 16, 2015, 11:43:37 AM
Quote from: OCGuy81 on April 16, 2015, 11:30:59 AM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvignette1.wikia.nocookie.net%2Fbttf%2Fimages%2F1%2F1d%2FMattel_Hoverboard.png%2Frevision%2Flatest%3Fcb%3D20110924125321&hash=7e0ba112484341090c095aa2fef63717c00d4544)
Fixed the aspect ratio for you...
Thank you! :-)
The lack of a good, simple, easy-to-use WYSIWYG web page creation/editing program.
There actually was such a thing a decade and a half ago (Claris Home Page) but it's long since bitten the dust. (And no, MS FrontPage did not count; it was not easy to use at all and unnecessarily bloated pages and sites it was used to create).
Fade-resistant red sign pigment
Flying cars and jet packs on our backs
Quote from: Henry on April 16, 2015, 12:54:10 PM
Flying cars and jet packs on our backs
How is that a 'thing that technology should have solved'?
Quote from: OCGuy81 on April 16, 2015, 11:30:59 AM
It's 2015! Where are our Hoverboards!
Still 6 months to go...
Quote from: english si on April 16, 2015, 01:03:01 PM
Quote from: OCGuy81 on April 16, 2015, 11:30:59 AM
It's 2015! Where are our Hoverboards!
Still 6 months to go...
Just remember - They don't work on water... Unless you have power!
Quote from: corco on April 16, 2015, 09:53:02 AM
The travelling salesman problem
I believe such was replaced by telemarketers & spam e-mails in most areas... due to technology.
Quote from: hbelkins on April 16, 2015, 12:08:15 PM
The lack of a good, simple, easy-to-use WYSIWYG web page creation/editing program.
That's because web pages are usually created in content management systems like WordPress or Drupal these days. Initial setup can be a little tricky but after that not only do you get WYSIWYG but consistent style between all pages without having to copy code between pages or use frames.
Didn't technology solve the #1 urban pollution problem of the late 19th/early 20th century - that being horse manure?
:hmmm:
:nod:
Mike
Getting rid of fossil fuels as back in the 80's we all thought that by this time electric cars would be the mode of transportation by this time.
However, we also dreamed then that mag lev trains would be all over as well, and just now in Florida we are just talking about making it a reality just for a 13 mile run.
Honestly it's inexcusable that we don't have cures for every disease by now. We've know about cancer for centuries and nothing. Same with ALS and heart disease. Not only should we have cures by know but there should have been cures for decades.
BTW, chemo is not a cure, it's a treatment and a costly one.
Quote from: tribar on April 17, 2015, 12:13:49 PM
Honestly it's inexcusable that we don't have cures for every disease by now. We've know about cancer for centuries and nothing. Same with ALS and heart disease. Not only should we have cures by know but there should have been cures for decades.
BTW, chemo is not a cure, it's a treatment and a costly one.
Cancer is a hard one. But there are plenty of diseases that we know exactly how to prevent or cure, and nevertheless still take lives every year. Mumps, whooping cough, tuberculosis, etc.
Cancer is less disease than it is malfunction. We can't vaccinate against ourselves, unfortunately. And it's such a diverse array of conditions that there is no single solution. We'll be working on that one for generations.
What's infuriating is the rebellion against public health, where people decline to vaccinate or even wash their hands because they think this is just an individual choice rather than an important component of a system of actions that work together.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on April 16, 2015, 11:30:59 AM
It's 2015! Where are our Hoverboards!
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvignette1.wikia.nocookie.net%2Fbttf%2Fimages%2F1%2F1d%2FMattel_Hoverboard.png%2Frevision%2Flatest%3Fcb%3D20110924125321&hash=7e0ba112484341090c095aa2fef63717c00d4544)
Heh. Thanks for posting that. Two days ago we were behind a DeLorean while stopped at a red light on the way home.
Quote from: tribar on April 17, 2015, 12:13:49 PM
Honestly it's inexcusable that we don't have cures for every disease by now. We've know about cancer for centuries and nothing. Same with ALS and heart disease. Not only should we have cures by know but there should have been cures for decades.
BTW, chemo is not a cure, it's a treatment and a costly one.
We do, but the big companies mainly such as Merck, Bristol Myers-Squibb, Johnson & Johnson, and Schering do not want to market it for fear of losing revenue. If they came out with the one drug that cures all, of course no recurring use of pills or shots would be needed and therefore less revenue coming in for these companies.
Quote from: roadman65 on April 17, 2015, 07:20:47 PM
Quote from: tribar on April 17, 2015, 12:13:49 PM
Honestly it's inexcusable that we don't have cures for every disease by now. We've know about cancer for centuries and nothing. Same with ALS and heart disease. Not only should we have cures by know but there should have been cures for decades.
BTW, chemo is not a cure, it's a treatment and a costly one.
We do, but the big companies mainly such as Merck, Bristol Myers-Squibb, Johnson & Johnson, and Schering do not want to market it for fear of losing revenue. If they came out with the one drug that cures all, of course no recurring use of pills or shots would be needed and therefore less revenue coming in for these companies.
However, the first company to market the Cure All would clean up. Therefore if any company really did have a Cure All, they would market it and then they could invest their profits in other fields.
Not to mention the tremendous ego boost that going down in history as the one to cure cancer would be. Think about it, if you had a cure for cancer, would any amount of money convince you to sit on it? Would you morally be okay with your boss sitting on it and allowing people to die for selfish reasons? Or would you leak it?
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 17, 2015, 08:00:21 PM
Not to mention the tremendous ego boost that going down in history as the one to cure cancer would be. Think about it, if you had a cure for cancer, would any amount of money convince you to sit on it? Would you morally be okay with your boss sitting on it and allowing people to die for selfish reasons? Or would you leak it?
Not all people think rationally! You would market it, I would market it, but the way some people are in today's world is to put profit in front of people.
Having to move, load, hang and fold laundry
a massive time sink
Adobe Flash.
That annoying problem of 12:00 flashing on my VCR. Technology should have fixed that years ago.
Oh wait..... :spin:
If a company had the cure for cancer, they would literally be the wealthiest company in the world when they got done marketing it.
Big Tobacco would also love to see a cure for cancer, for obvious reasons.
Quote from mjk920:
QuoteDidn't technology solve the #1 urban pollution problem of the late 19th/early 20th century - that being horse manure
Thank You! I've mentioned that on this forum before. People complain about pollution from cars, but forget that it's way better than having streets covered with feces.
Speaking of feces...The biggest issues I wish technology could solve are with toilets. They clog way too easily. I get tired of having to plunge them every time I have a decent-sized movement. Not only that, but there is the pee on the seat issue. There is no way to raise the seat easily because it has no handle.
Toilets really need a redesign.
Speaking of toilets, I want to know why plungers are still round even though the holes in modern toilets are rectangular. Seriously, a round plunger for a rectangular toilet is useless... in fact, it can make a clog even WORSE if you don't give up quickly enough and call a plumber.
I had a roommate once who would throw on a glove and dig into the rectangular hole to find the clog. Better him than me, I suppose.
Why not Japanese-style squat toilets? The human butt is designed to do its thing squatting down, after all...
Quote from: Thing 342 on April 17, 2015, 09:35:32 PM
Adobe Flash.
We have a solution for that. It's called HTML 5. Not everyone has caught on yet, though.
#43. Ugh, getting the last dregs of peanut butter out of the jar.
Quote from: vdeane on April 18, 2015, 12:48:16 AM
Speaking of toilets, I want to know why plungers are still round even though the holes in modern toilets are rectangular. Seriously, a round plunger for a rectangular toilet is useless... in fact, it can make a clog even WORSE if you don't give up quickly enough and call a plumber.
Get a toilet snake (also called an auger, but the snake is a particular design). It'll often do the job where a plunger won't, though it does leave you with having to pull the wad of TP off the end. Our toilets have more of an oval-shaped hole. I have a purple plastic plunger that looks totally unlike the round rubber things most people use. It's quite effective and almost always does the job, but once or twice it hasn't worked and the snake has solved the problem those times.
I have occasionally reached in, without a glove, to yank out some TP when I can see the clog. I figure I'm going to wash my hands thoroughly anyway, so what difference does it make.
Returning to things I would have thought technology would solve, how about weeds in the flower bed. None of the various products you can buy at the garden center seem to do the job of keeping it weed-free and eventually you wind up having to pull some out by hand.
Another: Some kind of metal that would be impervious to rust and wear, such as that caused by winter road treatments, thereby eliminating the need to use an undercarriage wash if your car-washing hose is inadequate to do a thorough job and you don't have the ability to put the car up on ramps (our driveway is sloped–not much, but enough to make ramps impractical).
Quote from: 1995hoo on April 18, 2015, 11:07:51 AM
Another: Some kind of metal that would be impervious to rust and wear, such as that caused by winter road treatments, thereby eliminating the need to use an undercarriage wash if your car-washing hose is inadequate to do a thorough job and you don't have the ability to put the car up on ramps (our driveway is sloped–not much, but enough to make ramps impractical).
Aluminum?
Quote from: 1995hoo on April 18, 2015, 11:07:51 AMReturning to things I would have thought technology would solve, how about weeds in the flower bed. None of the various products you can buy at the garden center seem to do the job of keeping it weed-free and eventually you wind up having to pull some out by hand.
Black plastic. Cut contractor bags into sheets, and overlap them with holes only where you intend to plant. Beyond this, expecting technology to allow you to dictate which plants grow and which do not is a little unrealistic, even if you resort to dumping chemicals in the soil.
QuoteAnother: Some kind of metal that would be impervious to rust and wear, such as that caused by winter road treatments, thereby eliminating the need to use an undercarriage wash if your car-washing hose is inadequate to do a thorough job and you don't have the ability to put the car up on ramps (our driveway is sloped–not much, but enough to make ramps impractical).
Interesting–most folks I know in climates that necessitate salt shut off and drain the hose for the winter.
I agree on the Toliet thing.
Also Tornadoes. They need the right ingredients for them to happen. Figure out a way to take one or more of the ingredients away:
Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 18, 2015, 04:14:48 PM
QuoteAnother: Some kind of metal that would be impervious to rust and wear, such as that caused by winter road treatments, thereby eliminating the need to use an undercarriage wash if your car-washing hose is inadequate to do a thorough job and you don't have the ability to put the car up on ramps (our driveway is sloped–not much, but enough to make ramps impractical).
Interesting–most folks I know in climates that necessitate salt shut off and drain the hose for the winter.
I definitely shut ours off and drain it. Your comment just underscores the point.
#101. Broadcast TV
Chalk this up to something that technology had solved, then somehow became unsolved (like the paper towels problem). Here it is 2015, I live in the biggest urban area in the U.S., and I can't receive free, over-the-air TV broadcasts.
Yes, I can pay to receive it–I used to pay Aereo for this, but antenna rental was outlawed by the Supreme Court. I can watch the channel over the network's online stream, but I have to pay a cable company for TV service first.
Somehow, I don't recall this being an issue in the 80s...
Quote from: empirestate on April 18, 2015, 06:03:28 PM
#101. Broadcast TV
Chalk this up to something that technology had solved, then somehow became unsolved (like the paper towels problem). Here it is 2015, I live in the biggest urban area in the U.S., and I can't receive free, over-the-air TV broadcasts.
Yes, I can pay to receive it–I used to pay Aereo for this, but antenna rental was outlawed by the Supreme Court. I can watch the channel over the network's online stream, but I have to pay a cable company for TV service first.
Somehow, I don't recall this being an issue in the 80s...
I watch free, over-the-air TV on a box the government paid for.
I don't need a converter because my TV was made after the digital conversion, but reception can be inconsistent. ABC can be strong one moment but drop out the next. It doesn't help that I have a ground floor apartment, and the room with the antenna is actually partially underground, such that the antenna has a direct sight line to the grass (or it would, if pointed out the window... the TV stations in the Albany area broadcast from the south, and the only wall I have facing south is a windowless wall the divides my apartment from the one next door). I can't even get PBS at all... thankfully, the only stations I actually care about are ABC and CBS. It's USUALLY fine, but if the signal starts pixelating during Once Upon a Time, I'm not a happy camper. I don't see why I should pay a cable company lots of money when most of my time spent watching TV is just the local news.
We use DirecTV for our two primary TVs due to the amount of sports we watch (yes, "we," my wife is every bit as rabid–and far less cynical!–a hockey fan as I am). The other two TVs, in the master bedroom and guest room, are on rabbit ears because it isn't worth paying for satellite service on TVs we watch for maybe half an hour each night and for maybe an hour on weekends. Depending on your location (we live around 12 miles south of the White House as the crow flies), an antenna can be outstanding, but in the wrong location it's worthless.
The funny thing, though, is that in our area if you want to use an antenna, it is vital that it receive both UHF and VHF due to where the networks broadcast. In many areas, all the networks now use UHF, which is a total reversal from how it used to be. Many of us probably remember how annoying it was as a kid when you wanted to watch Sesame Street and you had to turn the dial to "U" and then twizzle the top knob all over the place. UHF reception stunk! Nowadays, in most cities all the networks moved their digital feeds to UHF but virtually "mapped" them to their old channel numbers. Here, some of them still use VHF. I find it pretty amusing that in 2015 we still have to think about UHF and VHF after all these years.
Quote from: 1995hoo on April 18, 2015, 09:00:05 PM
The funny thing, though, is that in our area if you want to use an antenna, it is vital that it receive both UHF and VHF due to where the networks broadcast. In many areas, all the networks now use UHF, which is a total reversal from how it used to be. Many of us probably remember how annoying it was as a kid when you wanted to watch Sesame Street and you had to turn the dial to "U" and then twizzle the top knob all over the place. UHF reception stunk! Nowadays, in most cities all the networks moved their digital feeds to UHF but virtually "mapped" them to their old channel numbers. Here, some of them still use VHF. I find it pretty amusing that in 2015 we still have to think about UHF and VHF after all these years.
As a child growing up in a small rural town, I could pick up channels from 2 cities...Shreveport & Monroe. We could get 2 channels of CBS & NBC and 1 channel of ABC & PBS. If reception was poor due to weather, we had to go out and turn the antenna to the other direction. Everyone in the living room would holler GOOD when reception was as good as it would get.
Our old RCA TV had the second UHF dial on it. The channel number went as high as 83. I never got a single channel on the UHF setting.
Quote from: NE2 on April 16, 2015, 01:01:23 PM
Quote from: Henry on April 16, 2015, 12:54:10 PM
Flying cars and jet packs on our backs
How is that a 'thing that technology should have solved'?
Many health problems and diseases that are prevalent now are a matter of behavior not microbes. Examples diabetes mellitus, obesity, heart disease etc. People need to eat better and move more.
The approach of looking for a pill, vaccine or medicine for everything. Better diet and exercise also increases immune function so you don't succumb to sickness
Quote from: tribar on April 17, 2015, 12:13:49 PM
Honestly it's inexcusable that we don't have cures for every disease by now. We've know about cancer for centuries and nothing. Same with ALS and heart disease. Not only should we have cures by know but there should have been cures for decades.
BTW, chemo is not a cure, it's a treatment and a costly one.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 17, 2015, 03:16:55 PM
Cancer is less disease than it is malfunction. We can't vaccinate against ourselves, unfortunately. And it's such a diverse array of conditions that there is no single solution. We'll be working on that one for generations.
What's infuriating is the rebellion against public health, where people decline to vaccinate or even wash their hands because they think this is just an individual choice rather than an important component of a system of actions that work together.
If the immune system is functioning at its optimum it will eliminate cancer cells. Cancer is cells that are not working right. Caused by chemical or environmental assault. The immunes system recognizes it as not right and eliminates the cell. BTW cancer needs an acidic enviromenrl to grow.
A pathogen needs an unhealthy host tissue to take hold. The great advances in disease treatment had more to do with improvements in sanitation than vaccines themselves. The incidence of pertussis, polio etc were declining before the introduction of vaccines.
Stupidity.
I thought having access to nearly all of the world's information was going to make everyone smarter, but results have been tepid.
Turns out, some people use this information portal to make themselves stupider. Rather than finding objective reality, they seek out anything that will reinforce their established biases, thus making them not only stupider, but louder about their stupidity. And honestly, it can be hard to not do. Especially if one is not aware of their biases.
I tend to think of the internet like a giant buffet. If I took you to an all you can eat, you'd probably still only eat the foods that you like and would probably only sample the things that you're unclear on. The vast availability of something doesn't change consumption habits, it just leads you to seek out more things that confirm what you already believe or know you like.
The internet also allows people with fringe beliefs to seek out others with those same fringe beliefs. Whereas 50 years ago, we all got our news from ABC, CBS and NBC only, today any wacko can get their news from whatever news source validates their beliefs. The fact that we only had three news sources seemed to have a moderating effect on our country because you couldn't just get your news filtered by whatever ideological prism that you prefer to see through.
Quote from: kkt on April 18, 2015, 12:35:08 PMQuote from: 1995hoo on April 18, 2015, 11:07:51 AMAnother: Some kind of metal that would be impervious to rust and wear, such as that caused by winter road treatments, thereby eliminating the need to use an undercarriage wash if your car-washing hose is inadequate to do a thorough job and you don't have the ability to put the car up on ramps (our driveway is sloped–not much, but enough to make ramps impractical).
Aluminum?
Aluminum does corrode, as anyone who has attempted to remove steel bolts from a cast aluminum engine block can tell you. Plus steel is pretty hard to beat for tensile strength. If I wished to produce the ultimate corrosion-proof car, I would look long and hard at composites for the spaceframe and plastic for outer body panels, but this would entail accepting a long list of compromises, starting with a completely revamped production process for the spaceframe and gaps between body panels as wide as the Grand Canyon to accommodate thermal expansion. (Body panel gaps are one reason the Saturn S-Series lost customer appeal in its later production years.)
Steel-bodied cars have in any case improved greatly in rust resistance since 1980. Nowadays, in many parts of the country--though not, admittedly, the salt belt states of the Northeast and upper Midwest--it is routine to find cars 20 years or older that have no visible cosmetic or underbody rust at all. Weldable electrodeposited primers, anti-corrosion waxes for enclosed sections, and chip-resistant paints for the underbody and lower body are major reasons for this, as is air filtration inside auto production plants. (Dirt in the paint in new cars is one reason the US automakers hemorrhaged market share to the Japanese in the 1980's.)
This is what I do to prevent underbody and lower-body rust:
* When it is snowing and deicing salts are in use in an attempt to defend a bare-pavement policy, we often try to use just one vehicle for errands.
* As soon as the snow stops (it never lasts long in these parts) and the roads dry out sufficiently that we can be sure salt won't just be redeposited on the underbody, I take the designated "snow car" to a DIY car wash and spray-wash it from top to bottom, rinsing the underbody twice with high-pressure water. It doesn't matter if temperatures are still well below freezing--I have washed cars in this way at night in temperatures as low as 20° F.
* In this area sand and fine gravel is often laid down for traction. When the roads dry out, this material becomes a chip hazard, so we avoid tracking through it whenever possible and try to slow down to less than 20 MPH when we absolutely have to drive through it (it is also a major skid hazard).
* After the last snow of the season, and preferably after a rainstorm has come along to leach the remaining salt out of the sand and gravel in the streets, I take each of the cars to the DIY wash for a thorough exterior cleaning, including a double rinse of the underbody. (A single rinse of the underbody is otherwise part of the year-round routine.)
* Factory mudguards are an "of course" option for new cars. About dealer-installed mudguards I am less certain since there is less quality control and no guarantee that the approved installation procedure does not include drilling new holes in the steel and thus compromising the factory rust protection.
* I remain aware of the temperature range when rust is most likely to occur--32° F to 40° F--and try to do the first salt-removal wash when it is still just under freezing (it doesn't matter that much if the wash water transiently raises underbody temperature above freezing as long as the salt gets off).
* We avoid driving on gravel and loose-surfaced roads and try to limit speeds to under 30 MPH when we have to do so.
I have gotten two cars to 22 and 21 years respectively with no underbody rust, though both have been domiciled in Kansas with little winter exposure to the salt belt. The 22-year-old car was starting to develop some wheel arch rust toward the end, however, and it had triple-layer welds at the back of each rear wheel arch, which were common rust initiation points for this model. (This experience prompts me to think twice about buying any car that has triple-layer welds.) It did have factory-approved mudguards installed as a retrofit when it was 11 years old and received an extensive application of aftermarket rustproofing on the underbody at approximately the same time. The 21-year-old car has plastic outer panels that cannot rust and has no underbody rust, though it has rust in the passenger-side rear door sill, a well-known problem in this model that has to do with leaky weatherstripping and primer in the dip bath not being able to reach the inside of the door sill while water intrudes with little difficulty during rainstorms.
IMHO, the biggest factor in cars lasting so much longer now in the 'north' is the auto makers converting to non-porous paint primers. Porous primers were AWFUL, as no matter what you did, should anything (ie, a stone that was kicked over by another vehicle) break the paint and salt water get in, there was nothing that could be done to slow down the corrosion and in fact washing the car made things worse in that the act of washing the car added moisture to that rusty blotch.
Mike
Quote from: The Nature Boy on April 19, 2015, 01:13:22 PMWhereas 50 years ago, we all got our news from ABC, CBS and NBC only, today any wacko can get their news from whatever news source validates their beliefs. The fact that we only had three news sources seemed to have a moderating effect on our country because you couldn't just get your news filtered by whatever ideological prism that you prefer to see through.
Actually, those three networks all filtered the news by the same ideological prism (they still do today) and until the 1980s, there really weren't any broadcast alternatives.
Quote from: The Nature Boy on April 19, 2015, 01:13:22 PM
I tend to think of the internet like a giant buffet. If I took you to an all you can eat, you'd probably still only eat the foods that you like and would probably only sample the things that you're unclear on. The vast availability of something doesn't change consumption habits, it just leads you to seek out more things that confirm what you already believe or know you like.
The internet also allows people with fringe beliefs to seek out others with those same fringe beliefs. Whereas 50 years ago, we all got our news from ABC, CBS and NBC only, today any wacko can get their news from whatever news source validates their beliefs. The fact that we only had three news sources seemed to have a moderating effect on our country because you couldn't just get your news filtered by whatever ideological prism that you prefer to see through.
That is maybe why we have so many taking sides nowadays. At one time we all did not use the term conservative or liberal at all. We loved or hated a president, governor, senator, etc. by the person and not so much by the party.
Now its the party or the stereotypes we make as parties what we judge by not the person. All because the number of endless outlets we take sides as each different outlet pushes their personal views on us. For example Fox, which should not be called Fox News at all, because they do not report the news like traditional journalists do, but give out commentary to the viewers and get them to join the bandwagon that they are on. Sean Hanity for one, only reports news that exposes his own political views and not events that are for public knowledge is the perfect example. Though I respect his right to free speech and commentary, still you cannot say he is a true news reporter.
Other outlets whether on cable, internet, or some other new means is always reporting with bias using the politically correct term to describe them and getting the public all wild up about their convictions which end up either being conservative, moderate, tea party, progressive or whatever.
Keeping those tiny model car/airplane/ship parts from becoming lost in the carpet while building the model.
Politics aside, I definitely agree that communication in general has been more hindered that aided by technology. Just look at any Facebook or YouTube comments thread.
iPhone
Quote from: empirestate on April 19, 2015, 06:28:36 PM
Politics aside, I definitely agree that communication in general has been more hindered that aided by technology. Just look at any Facebook or YouTube comments thread.
iPhone
Maybe not originally, but when people started to type (mostly typing on the Internet and texting) as a replacement for talking, that's when it got worse.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 18, 2015, 04:14:48 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on April 18, 2015, 11:07:51 AMReturning to things I would have thought technology would solve, how about weeds in the flower bed. None of the various products you can buy at the garden center seem to do the job of keeping it weed-free and eventually you wind up having to pull some out by hand.
Black plastic. Cut contractor bags into sheets, and overlap them with holes only where you intend to plant. Beyond this, expecting technology to allow you to dictate which plants grow and which do not is a little unrealistic, even if you resort to dumping chemicals in the soil.
QuoteAnother: Some kind of metal that would be impervious to rust and wear, such as that caused by winter road treatments, thereby eliminating the need to use an undercarriage wash if your car-washing hose is inadequate to do a thorough job and you don't have the ability to put the car up on ramps (our driveway is sloped–not much, but enough to make ramps impractical).
Interesting–most folks I know in climates that necessitate salt shut off and drain the hose for the winter.
I have a hose bibb in the garage, but I definitely shut off the one outside in winter.
Quote from: 1 on April 19, 2015, 06:37:02 PM
Quote from: empirestate on April 19, 2015, 06:28:36 PM
Politics aside, I definitely agree that communication in general has been more hindered that aided by technology. Just look at any Facebook or YouTube comments thread.
iPhone
Maybe not originally, but when people started to type (mostly typing on the Internet and texting) as a replacement for talking, that's when it got worse.
No it didn't. The Internet simply allows you to expose yourself to a wider spectrum of idiocy than you would have run into otherwise.
Weight loss is another one. You gain weight because you're body holds onto fat (or something like that). Invent something that prevents that from happening.
Obviously you can just eat healthier. But it would be nice to splurge and not have to worry about gaining weight.
Quote from: tribar on April 19, 2015, 09:24:22 PM
Weight loss is another one. You gain weight because you're body holds onto fat (or something like that). Invent something that prevents that from happening.
Obviously you can just eat healthier. But it would be nice to splurge and not have to worry about gaining weight.
Yes, technology replacing the need for personal responsibility would be great. The above comments about the internet, however, detail the fact that this isn't yet the case even though people think it is.
Quote from: tribar on April 19, 2015, 09:24:22 PM
Weight loss is another one. You gain weight because you're body holds onto fat (or something like that). Invent something that prevents that from happening.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fe%2Fec%2FAdipose.jpg&hash=f7f4926a814294deb6e23c8a27a5f7026b765ca2)
Didn't we learn from Wall-E that technology will just make us all morbidly obese because it'll eliminate our need to actually do anything?
Dishwashers that actually clean glasses, dishes, utensils, and cups...allowing you to bypass the pre-wash chore altogether.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 19, 2015, 01:07:08 PM
Stupidity.
I thought having access to nearly all of the world's information was going to make everyone smarter, but results have been tepid.
Turns out, some people use this information portal to make themselves stupider. Rather than finding objective reality, they seek out anything that will reinforce their established biases, thus making them not only stupider, but louder about their stupidity. And honestly, it can be hard to not do. Especially if one is not aware of their biases.
I think there's plenty to be learned, but if most of the time spent on the Internet is used for idle chit-chat, there's less gained other than the awesome ability to converse with folks around the world (or down the block). Plus, groups usually tend to get annoyed by the know-it-all rather than the anti-intellectuals, unless an open question is asked.
On the other hand, I think people's expectations are totally out of whack: that we should "know everything" or never make mistakes again due to magic portable web devices...well, public use of the Internet is still in its teenage years. We jump on petty errors like it's a beloved animal that suddenly went rouge and killed grandma.
Quote from: formulanone on April 20, 2015, 07:38:13 AM
Dishwashers that actually clean glasses, dishes, utensils, and cups...allowing you to bypass the pre-wash chore altogether.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 19, 2015, 01:07:08 PM
Stupidity.
I thought having access to nearly all of the world's information was going to make everyone smarter, but results have been tepid.
Turns out, some people use this information portal to make themselves stupider. Rather than finding objective reality, they seek out anything that will reinforce their established biases, thus making them not only stupider, but louder about their stupidity. And honestly, it can be hard to not do. Especially if one is not aware of their biases.
I think there's plenty to be learned, but if most of the time spent on the Internet is used for idle chit-chat, there's less gained other than the awesome ability to converse with folks around the world (or down the block). Plus, groups usually tend to get annoyed by the know-it-all rather than the anti-intellectuals, unless an open question is asked.
On the other hand, I think people's expectations are totally out of whack: that we should "know everything" or never make mistakes again due to magic portable web devices...well, public use of the Internet is still in its teenage years. We jump on petty errors like it's a beloved animal that suddenly went rouge and killed grandma.
What mostly strikes me, and this is in real life as well as online, is that with all the information available, people don't actually observe it, digest it, consider it, and act according to it. People don't make decisions based on the information in front of them, and don't become better informed by it. We've all seen examples of this online, of course, but it happens in real life too, like people crossing the street who haven't yet looked at the information of whether vehicles are about to run them over, or merging into a lane without using the information of whether there's a car in it.
Quote from: hbelkins on April 19, 2015, 03:58:01 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on April 19, 2015, 01:13:22 PMWhereas 50 years ago, we all got our news from ABC, CBS and NBC only, today any wacko can get their news from whatever news source validates their beliefs. The fact that we only had three news sources seemed to have a moderating effect on our country because you couldn't just get your news filtered by whatever ideological prism that you prefer to see through.
Actually, those three networks all filtered the news by the same ideological prism (they still do today) and until the 1980s, there really weren't any broadcast alternatives.
LOL @ Hep B and the "liberal media".
Quote from: roadman65 on April 19, 2015, 04:23:10 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on April 19, 2015, 01:13:22 PM
I tend to think of the internet like a giant buffet. If I took you to an all you can eat, you'd probably still only eat the foods that you like and would probably only sample the things that you're unclear on. The vast availability of something doesn't change consumption habits, it just leads you to seek out more things that confirm what you already believe or know you like.
The internet also allows people with fringe beliefs to seek out others with those same fringe beliefs. Whereas 50 years ago, we all got our news from ABC, CBS and NBC only, today any wacko can get their news from whatever news source validates their beliefs. The fact that we only had three news sources seemed to have a moderating effect on our country because you couldn't just get your news filtered by whatever ideological prism that you prefer to see through.
That is maybe why we have so many taking sides nowadays. At one time we all did not use the term conservative or liberal at all. We loved or hated a president, governor, senator, etc. by the person and not so much by the party.
Now its the party or the stereotypes we make as parties what we judge by not the person. All because the number of endless outlets we take sides as each different outlet pushes their personal views on us. For example Fox, which should not be called Fox News at all, because they do not report the news like traditional journalists do, but give out commentary to the viewers and get them to join the bandwagon that they are on. Sean Hanity for one, only reports news that exposes his own political views and not events that are for public knowledge is the perfect example. Though I respect his right to free speech and commentary, still you cannot say he is a true news reporter.
Other outlets whether on cable, internet, or some other new means is always reporting with bias using the politically correct term to describe them and getting the public all wild up about their convictions which end up either being conservative, moderate, tea party, progressive or whatever.
None of this is even remotely true. Partisanism has been going on since before the country even existed.
The prism the major news outlets filter through is that of whatever profits the shareholders of their multinational corporation parents. Hardly new.
Quote from: bugo on April 22, 2015, 01:13:13 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 19, 2015, 04:23:10 PM
Quote from: The Nature Boy on April 19, 2015, 01:13:22 PM
I tend to think of the internet like a giant buffet. If I took you to an all you can eat, you'd probably still only eat the foods that you like and would probably only sample the things that you're unclear on. The vast availability of something doesn't change consumption habits, it just leads you to seek out more things that confirm what you already believe or know you like.
The internet also allows people with fringe beliefs to seek out others with those same fringe beliefs. Whereas 50 years ago, we all got our news from ABC, CBS and NBC only, today any wacko can get their news from whatever news source validates their beliefs. The fact that we only had three news sources seemed to have a moderating effect on our country because you couldn't just get your news filtered by whatever ideological prism that you prefer to see through.
That is maybe why we have so many taking sides nowadays. At one time we all did not use the term conservative or liberal at all. We loved or hated a president, governor, senator, etc. by the person and not so much by the party.
Now its the party or the stereotypes we make as parties what we judge by not the person. All because the number of endless outlets we take sides as each different outlet pushes their personal views on us. For example Fox, which should not be called Fox News at all, because they do not report the news like traditional journalists do, but give out commentary to the viewers and get them to join the bandwagon that they are on. Sean Hanity for one, only reports news that exposes his own political views and not events that are for public knowledge is the perfect example. Though I respect his right to free speech and commentary, still you cannot say he is a true news reporter.
Other outlets whether on cable, internet, or some other new means is always reporting with bias using the politically correct term to describe them and getting the public all wild up about their convictions which end up either being conservative, moderate, tea party, progressive or whatever.
None of this is even remotely true. Partisanism has been going on since before the country even existed.
Yeah, ever see the attacks in the various newspapers against John Adams, or Thomas Jefferson? They can make today's partisanship look downright quaint.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 22, 2015, 09:29:36 AM
The prism the major news outlets filter through is that of whatever profits the shareholders of their multinational corporation parents. Hardly new.
Or whatever the owner or lead editor deem it should be.
Quote from: NE2 on April 19, 2015, 11:58:54 PM
Quote from: tribar on April 19, 2015, 09:24:22 PM
Weight loss is another one. You gain weight because you're body holds onto fat (or something like that). Invent something that prevents that from happening.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fe%2Fec%2FAdipose.jpg&hash=f7f4926a814294deb6e23c8a27a5f7026b765ca2)
I'm not so sure I'd want to use anything from Adipose Industries.
Quote from: formulanone on April 20, 2015, 07:38:13 AMDishwashers that actually clean glasses, dishes, utensils, and cups...allowing you to bypass the pre-wash chore altogether.
Consumer Reports claims that they exist. We did purchase a new dishwasher in 2011 and we have noticed that cleaning performance has decreased more or less monotonically since then, except for brief periods of recovery after running an empty cycle with a descaling agent.
I suspect dishwashers do in fact require some routine maintenance to maintain as-new performance, but the manufacturers do not tell consumers about it so that they can claim to sell a completely maintenance-free product, and the necessary work goes beyond empty cycles with a descaling agent.
It is similar to what has been happening with automatic transmissions in passenger cars for at least the last 30 years. The automakers like to pretend that sheardown doesn't occur to the factory fill so that they can sell the cars as requiring only oil changes up to some very high mileage value that, in the majority of cases, is not seen by the first owner. Meanwhile, an owner planning to hold the car for the long term usually comes out ahead if he or she changes the fluid every 30,000 miles or (if the transmission is equipped with an easily replaced external filter) uses a full-synthetic fluid known for shear stability as lifetime fill.
Quote from: Brandon on April 22, 2015, 09:52:48 AM
Quote from: NE2 on April 19, 2015, 11:58:54 PM
Quote from: tribar on April 19, 2015, 09:24:22 PM
Weight loss is another one. You gain weight because you're body holds onto fat (or something like that). Invent something that prevents that from happening.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fe%2Fec%2FAdipose.jpg&hash=f7f4926a814294deb6e23c8a27a5f7026b765ca2)
I'm not so sure I'd want to use anything from Adipose Industries.
But the fat just walks away!
Quote from: vdeane on April 22, 2015, 08:27:59 PM
Quote from: Brandon on April 22, 2015, 09:52:48 AM
Quote from: NE2 on April 19, 2015, 11:58:54 PM
Quote from: tribar on April 19, 2015, 09:24:22 PM
Weight loss is another one. You gain weight because you're body holds onto fat (or something like that). Invent something that prevents that from happening.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fe%2Fec%2FAdipose.jpg&hash=f7f4926a814294deb6e23c8a27a5f7026b765ca2)
I'm not so sure I'd want to use anything from Adipose Industries.
But the fat just walks away!
Until the day they need to make a break for it because a certain nosy Doctor and a certain nosy redhead start prying around their headquarters. :bigass:
#287. Car alarms.
I get that, when this was new-fangled 80s technology, it suffered from an unreliable, hair-trigger functionality. But surely by now, we can develop an alarm system that knows the difference between a car being stolen, and NOTHING.
iPhone
Quote from: empirestate on April 26, 2015, 03:01:31 PM
#287. Car alarms.
I get that, when this was new-fangled 80s technology, it suffered from an unreliable, hair-trigger functionality. But surely by now, we can develop an alarm system that knows the difference between a car being stolen, and NOTHING.
iPhone
When I was a student at Jolly Polly Prostitute (aka Louisiana Tech University), a train would pass by several times per day and night. Parking along W. Railroad Ave. was full during the day. Everytime a train went by, at least a dozen alarms would go off everyday.
Quote from: empirestate on April 26, 2015, 03:01:31 PM
#287. Car alarms.
I get that, when this was new-fangled 80s technology, it suffered from an unreliable, hair-trigger functionality. But surely by now, we can develop an alarm system that knows the difference between a car being stolen, and NOTHING.
iPhone
I've seen car alarms being set off as I rode by parked cars in a fire truck.
Quote from: andrewkbrown on April 27, 2015, 09:27:39 AM
Quote from: empirestate on April 26, 2015, 03:01:31 PM
#287. Car alarms.
I get that, when this was new-fangled 80s technology, it suffered from an unreliable, hair-trigger functionality. But surely by now, we can develop an alarm system that knows the difference between a car being stolen, and NOTHING.
iPhone
I've seen car alarms being set off as I rode by parked cars in a fire truck.
Exactly, and to my knowledge nobody has ever stolen a car by driving a truck past it. There's always at least one more intermediate step.
One technological improvement in car alarms is the "crazy random honking" alarm pattern. I've seen heads turn from those where regular alarms just annoy the desensitized.
One piece of technology should be able to solve that car alarm problem, though - a .50 caliber machine cannon.
:nod:
:thumbsup:
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on April 27, 2015, 11:48:11 AM
One piece of technology should be able to solve that car alarm problem, though - a .50 caliber machine cannon.
:nod:
:thumbsup:
Mike
I really don't think that would make the neighborhood quieter.
Quote from: kkt on April 27, 2015, 12:46:04 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on April 27, 2015, 11:48:11 AM
One piece of technology should be able to solve that car alarm problem, though - a .50 caliber machine cannon.
:nod:
:thumbsup:
Mike
I really don't think that would make the neighborhood quieter.
Not quieter, but MUCH more safer! :bigass: :clap:
The marching band drum line tried to set off car alarms while marching through the parking lot from the school to the stadium. Often successful.