Re: Antilock brakes

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:17:47 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Erann Gat)
wrote:

>The speed was not so much of a factor (I think) as the fact that it was a
>downhill slope.

It's all about momentum and kinetic energy; how you acquire it doesn't
matter so much as the fact that you've got it.

>One rainy day when I was young and foolish I discovered the joys of
>applying the parking brake while moving and intentionally fishtailing my
>car.  I got fairly good at it, being able to bring the tail around 20 or
>30 degrees before recovering.  I thought it was great fun until I managed
>to unintentionally spin it 720 degrees while going around a turn. 
>Fortunately, no damage was done, and I have since driven for decades
>without ever losing control of my car -- until the other day.  So while I
>can't be sure, I'm fairly confident I could have done better without the
>ABS.

This is, of course, exactly the same kind of argument that people often
put up as "evidence" against seatbelts--they cite a personal anecdote
concerning some particular event in which they assert that the use of
seatbelts caused (or would have caused) more harm than good,
conveniently ignoring the vast body of knowledge supporting the value of
seatbelts in the great majority of accidents. It's the Creationist
approach.

I also have to say that your use of an example in which you present your
skill at causing a car to fishtail on demand to support your assertion
that you can control your car better without ABS than with doesn't
really bolster your reputation in the static/dynamic typing debate.

-Steve