You grok?

SAN DIEGO – Toyota said there were “significant inconsistencies” between a California man’s claim that his Prius sped out of control and the findings of the company’s preliminary investigation.

Toyota said in a statement that the accelerator pedal was tested and found to be working normally and a backup safety system worked properly. The automaker said the front brakes showed severe wear and damage from overheating, but the rear brakes and parking brake were in good condition.

The motorist, James Sikes, said his car raced to 94 mph on a freeway near San Diego last week. The March 8 incident ended when Sikes stopped the car with help from a California Highway Patrol officer.

Read the full article @msn.com

Curious, why did he not simply place the car in neutral and pull over to the side of the road? Maybe the inconsistencies with the driver?

- The recall was for the “floor mat” which could cover the pedal, however he claimed it had stuck down, and upon further research (in quote), it was found that the breaks were worn down. Seems like some one is just wanting some money from Toyota

Here is what he told reporters Sunday:

“They have never been able to replicate an incident of sudden acceleration. Mr. Sikes never had a problem in the three years he owned this vehicle,”

Curiously the problem only occurred after the recall….

follow up on:
GM joins the recall bandwagon!
The Toyota “Bash”
Media continues its siege! (Toyota)

Several nominees for the prestigious 2010 prize, which was awarded last year to President Obama, surfaced on Wednesday in news reports. Among them: “The Internet” and, separately, several of the Web’s creators, including Larry Roberts, Vint Cerf and Tim Berners-Lee, who is pictured above.

Read more

I have seen a man ride a horse.

I have seen a bear ride a horse.

I have seen a Lion ride a horse.

But I have never seen a man ride a Bear until now! How to obtain your bear mount in four easy to follow steps. Step One: Travel to the Kodiak Archipelago in southern alaska, during the spring months in order to allow for several months for finding a bear.

Step Two: Remove your clothing and venture into the wilderness with nothing, but a cloth draped over your privites, and a hunting knife. During this step you must become one with nature, feel what nature feels, see what nature sees, run as the wolf, and hunt as the eagle. Once this is completed (several months in all likely hood) it is time to find the Bear you desire.

Step Three: Upon finding a bear that you wish to make yours:

• Approch slowly, possibly follow at a distance for several days
• When the Bear becomes accustomed to your presence attempt to pet the Bear. Once the bear is touched the ritual has begun! At this point you have only a few moments to either conquer the bear, or become conquered yourself.

Step Four (The Ritual): When initiated you must jump on the bears back, and while holding on for dear life grab (at this time your very long hair), and place it into the space between the shoulders where your hair will intermingle with that of the bears. You may only have a moment to do this. Once complete you and the bears souls are intertwined forever, allowing only you to ride the beast.

Step Five: You may now join the Bear Cavalry!

*see if you can find the false logic.

The problem is as follows:

Suppose you’re on a game show, and you’re given the choice of three doors: Behind one door is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick a door, say No. 1, and the host, who knows what’s behind the doors, opens another door, say No. 3, which has a goat. He then says to you, “Do you want to pick door No. 2?” Is it to your advantage to switch your choice? (Whitaker 1990)

As the player cannot be certain which of the two remaining unopened doors is the winning door, most people assume that each of these doors has an equal probability and conclude that switching does not matter. In fact, in the usual interpretation of the problem the player should switch—doing so doubles the probability of winning the car, from 1/3 to 2/3.(This is from wikipedia)

To the right is a chart of the options. The numbers represent the doors you have to choose from, the letters represent the different situations you can be placed in. This means that you have 9 possible choices (for you do not know what situation you are in), and only 3 possible solutions.

Then as stated one of the doors are opened to reveal a goat, leaving you with the chart on the left. (The chart assumes that door 3 is opened revealing a goat, leaving only situations A and B and Door 1 and 2)

Now according to “Wheeler 1991; Mack 1992; Schwager 1994; vos Savant 1996:8; Martin 2002. (wiki)”  when the host removes (lets say the 3rd door), and asks you if you want to swtich you should always switch, for there is a 2/3 chance of getting it correct when you switch. However, when looking above you can clearly see that there is only 1/2 chance of getting the car in both situations A and B if you stay with what you pick.

To support my thesis that “after one door is opened you have a 50% chance of obtaining the car” I did research by having my brother (who did not know what i was testing) randomly shuffle 3 cards, have me pick one, flip one (not the card I was looking for) over, and then I would always stay with the original card I picked. Out of 100 times, 52 times I stayed and was correct, 48 I changed and was in correct.

(This explanation assumes that the host in the “game” is rewarded when you are incorrect, and that there truly is a car as stated.)

*The reality is you should actually come out 1/3 of the time I am correct when I don’t change, and 2/3 of the time I am correct when I change. Visit Here for the full explanation.