In the 1980’s about 50 children in the United States were killed by automatic garage door openers, typically by getting trapped beneath as the motor continued to try to close the door completely. 20,000 – 30,000 people were injured by garage door openers per year.
In 1993 the industry worked with UL to introduce new safety standards requiring non-contact sensors, like the infrared beams you probably have at the base of your garage door, as well as current sensors for the motor, so if there’s a spike in current it reverses.
There’s also typically a timeout that if for any reason the door hasn’t reached an endpoint by a certain time it reverses.
I’m a member of that UL safety committee.
These and other safety measures have dramatically reduced the number of injuries from garage doors. Remember that 20 – 30,000 injury per year statistic? In 2022 there were 34.
Even over the last five years the UL safety team I am on has continued to add improvements (yes, “regulations” for those of you that think that’s a dirty word), and the injury rate has fallen about 13% per year over the last five years.
That an engineering team would decide that when an automatically closing door hits an obstacle that it would KEEP TRYING WITH EVEN MORE FORCE is absolutely mind-boggling to me.
The right thing to do – as both common sense and actual field data easily show – is to reverse to release the pressure, give some type of indicator that there is a blockage or problem, and wait for a human to deal with it.
In cases where you really need the door to close and there is some issue, for garage doors we allow “constant pressure” on a button – meaning that a human needs to hold the button down continuously while the door is in motion, to make sure no one is getting hurt.
And the button needs to be located where the person pushing it can see the door closing (so you can’t do it from an app, for example).
I’m sorry this is so long. But having spent decades working to prevent children from dying, this really upsets me personally. I know that for some of you the idea of regulations like UL325 forcing manufacturers to meet safety standards goes against your libertarian ideals.
But I’ve seen first-hand how life-saving they can be.
And also I know that many of you think that companies only have nefarious motives – and sometimes they do. But I know that the garage door safety committee is staffed with people employed by manufacturers who are all committed to continuously making products safer.
END
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
ANNOUNCEMENT!
The indefatigable @djackthompson and I have been collaborating on a new game, and it has reached a point where we are ready to pull back the curtain a bit.
Introducing:
---------
Zheng He, and the Voyages of the Ming Treasure Fleet
---------
A brief thread:
Between 1405 and 1433, Chinese emperor Yongle launched seven voyages through the Indian Ocean to trade and spread Chinese influence as far as west Africa.
He put his childhood friend and servant Zheng He in charge of the fleet, numbering over 300 ships and 25,000 people.
"Zheng He" is a solitaire game that puts you in the shoes of Zheng He, challenging you to recreate these epic voyages. You play a full campaign against a dynamic and evolving political situation throughout the Indian Ocean, or experience a single historical voyage.
Re: Kickstarter blockchain announcement - I received an interesting email laying out what may be behind this. Author requested to remain anonymous, but here are the details from them:
🧵:
Europe has a new law in place that will place some restrictions on crowdfunding platforms. This has not been widely reported, mainly because it is a European issue. Source (French): compte-pro.com/crowdfunding-l…
To summarize: within 1 year, crowdfunding sites will have to have approval from the European Union. Also, they will be responsible in case of failure of a project, and will have to pay back in this case.
Until recently I never truly grasped that the fundamental social contract of Democracy is that the losers of elections accept the results and graciously cede power.
Board games are a critical part of teaching that lesson to children.
A short thread.
Candyland, Chutes & Ladders, and other classic first games are not about teaching strategy & tactics. They are about teaching the building blocks of games – taking turns, and being a gracious loser and winner.
And, not coincidentally, these are important societal lessons as well
Democracy is the *voluntary* adoption by those in power of rules about taking turns, winning, and losing. It is the magic circle writ large – so large perhaps, that we don’t realize we are in it until we see people who break the unwritten foundational rules.
I read the main paper from France that started the craze over hydroxychloroquine, and there are some things you should know. Here’s the paper if you’d like to read along: sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
1. Sample size was small – 26 received hydroxychlorine (hxc) and 16 were in the control group, who did not get hxc. The groups were not randomized, and were not blind. Everyone knew who was getting what.
2. If anyone was moved to the ICU they were REMOVED FROM THE STUDY. This is because the test they were doing was nasal swabs to see how much virus was in the patient (viral load). They couldn’t swab patients in the ICU.
First, I think that a lot of the differences of opinion are about terminology. Many of you said - no that's uncertainty, but it's not randomness.
In "Uncertainty In Games", Greg Costikyan argues convincingly that every game has uncertainty. If it doesn't - if the path and outcome of the game are known in advance - then it isn't a game. So just calling it "Uncertainty" is completely unhelpful.