Hacker News Reader

> Of all the crazy things people have asked me to do to their car, none of it would be more dangerous than a touchscreen for driver controls, and especially one with entertainment features.

I drive an older car with an old fashioned CD player rather than an infotainment system so what do I do? That's right. I put my phone in a cradle next to the steering wheel and use Spotify.

Apart from the serious issues caused by the lack of tactile feedback and the fact you have to look at the interface to use it, it's like the Spotify product development teams have gone out of their way to make the app clumsy and dangerous to use whilst driving. It is crappy and unresponsive, with way too much clutter.

I swear, Spotify have a giant engineering team and I have literally no idea what they spend their time doing: it's certainly nothing that I find useful or that improves my experience.

So in order to avoid dying or killing anybody else I plug the phone in to the aux socket on the car stereo (no Bluetooth in my car), select a playlist before I set off, and then let it do its thing. I'd switch back to CDs but they're a pain in the ass to carry in bulk. Or I listen to an audiobook.

I hate touch interfaces in cars.

Even better is Pandora. I switched to Apple Music mostly because my car forced me to use some shitshow built in Pandora mode that works poorly and locks out the Pandora interface on the phone!

I hate driving and fill the navigator/DJ role in the car. Assuming I’m driving in a 7 passenger car is dumb.

That is another good point - having a passenger. Our Toyota has safety features prevent bringing up a keyboard (mainly for the gps to search for new locations while driving). The car needs to be stopped. For a solo driver this makes sense ... but I know my local area ... the only time I ever need this is when I'm on a roadtrip and usually the passenger is the one making the change. I want _more_ powerful interfaces and touch is fine for a passenger coordinating with the driver, even though a physical interface for the driver with better integration into apps would work better for that use case. One-size doesn't fit all.

Exactly! People seem to underestimate the power in preparation before you leave for a trip. Pick what you want to listen to, and suck it up if a song comes up that you don't like. Before internet everywhere, you had to load up the CD, or you were stuck with the radio. We all still survived. The convenience of all this crap seems to just enable people to start driving before they think about their trip.

This goes for navigation too. You should review your route before you leave, and at the very least have it plugged into your nav unit before you drive off.

There's no excuse for fucking with all this stuff while you drive. If you really need to change something, just pull off for for a minute.

Is Spotify car mode still too much in your opinion? I don't look at my phone when driving as much as possible (except for directions, honestly), but it's pretty good for limiting distraction.

https://spotify-everywhere.com/pages/drive

> Access Car View

> This simplified Spotify dashboard appears automatically when your phone is connected using Bluetooth.

Oh. Nice. Looks better than the "main" UI. I guess I'll have to dig up a BLE module and try to make it pretend it's a car.

You can enable car mode manually! Just go to Settings > Car > Switch to car mode and change it to Always.

This looks pretty good, although of course lacking Bluetooth I've never seen it. Looks like you have to go into Settings to enable it manually when you're connecting with a cable but, yes, seems like an improvement. Thank you!

How old fashioned is the CD player? My Civic from the (past (past decade)) supported MP3/WMA CDs and it ruled. I'd burn a couple hundred tracks of whatever I was obsessed with atm, put it on shuffle, then be set for a few months. No screens and no disc swapping either.

I guess I still have my mp3s from 2008, but what about new music?

Buy CDs of the stuff you like?

I do this where I can. Unfortunately lots of newer music increasingly doesn't offer the option of a physical copy, or physical copies are produced only in limited numbers.

The other trend I've seen a bit is digital and streaming releases, with a vinyl physical release, but no CD version. I mean, fine, whatever, if that's what the market wants I suppose.

I don't tend to mind too much if FLAC is an option (usually the case if available on Bandcamp), but it's pretty annoying when the only options are MP3s or streaming, which tends to be the case with albums only available through more mainstream distribution channels such as Amazon (I'm looking at you Dark Country album series).

The only thing I have that can play cds are video game consoles.

I did the whole binders of cds and the giant cd towers to hold my music, that was a giant pain. I jumped on mp3s as soon as I could, and then once Spotify launched in the US I joined and never looked back.

I like bandcamp.

slsk is still kicking. I downloaded at least 100 new albums in 2020.

Too old fashioned for that unfortunately, otherwise it would be a good option.

Holy hell, Spotify. I've been using it a lot up to about 4-5 years go, both desktop and mobile. It was a fine app, I used it a lot to listen to music during commute. I curated some 20 personal playlists, and a bunch of shared ones too. But after I didn't need to commute anymore, I stopped using it.

Fast forward to January, my wife learned there are some good nursery rhymes on Spotify, and she installed the app on a spare phone. Few days ago, she was busy and asked me to play the Spotify playlist she usually plays to our kid. I couldn't do it. The current UI is completely inscrutable to me. All I could do is find a few album covers that, upon tapping, led to something that perhaps was a playlist, perhaps a "radio", perhaps something else. In 5 minutes of focused attempt, I couldn't find a way to list what songs are a part of the playlist I selected.

So I ultimately played something that looked like the right playlist, it played a song I recognized, then it played an ad, then it turned out to be a "radio".

It's rare that bad UX triggers a strong emotional reaction in me these days, but that did it. What the fuck, Spotify?

There is no way to list every single song by an artist. What the fuck Spotify, indeed.

Spotify... Isn't meant to be used while driving. Nothing on your phone is. It's illegal. You're not supposed to be doing it at all, ever...

I do think that it's ridiculous that Spotify hasn't improved their app in the 5 years I've been using it and is still missing really basic playback features, but when the competition is Apple Music, they're still by far the best music service that exists.

But I don't see the complaint that it's not got to be used while driving. Phones aren't supposed to be used while driving altogether.

> It's illegal

Not everywhere... only in some jurisdictions.

I don't know about the apple equivalent, but Spotify is available as a music app in android auto. The interface is intentionally trimmed down such that your touch interactions are limited.

Instead, it wants you to do as much as possible by voice. It almost works, but is frustrating enough I learned to just get the songs and albums i want lined up in advance and can get to in 2-3 touches. Not quite the same as tactile controls, but pretty close.

> Nothing on your phone is. It's illegal.

Wrong.

In the UK it is legal to use a phone in your car handsfree as long as the phone is in a cradle/bracket. Since, I think, last year the gov closed a loophole so you can't have the phone in your hand for any reason whilst driving.

Might vary in other countries/jurisdictions of course.

Have you tried using voice controls? Not perfect but they work well enough in my experience.

Some songs and artists I like it is so bad at recognizing that I learned to just preload everything in advance. Honestly, it is vetter that way- voice controls are frustrating enough to soak up too much attention, even though your eyes don't leave the road.

Yeah, the error rate is too high such that the voice controls become a distraction in themselves. Not a fan.

> So in order to avoid dying or killing anybody else I plug the phone in to the aux socket on the car stereo (no Bluetooth in my car), select a playlist before I set off, and then let it do its thing. I'd switch back to CDs but they're a pain in the ass to carry in bulk.

Way back when, I had a Zen Stone to play music in the car. It was everything I wanted; it stored music and was operated purely by touch, not even having a display. It was tiny and easy to carry (though mostly I just left it in the car).

Since that worked so well, I now have a SanDisk Clip Sport which appears to channel the same ideas. Sadly, I've never really had occasion to use it -- I don't do much driving anymore, and I've never had a car with an audio in port. (I plugged the Zen Stone into a cassette tape adapter...)

But if you really think CDs would be better than your phone except for the bulkiness (and I would agree), that's probably the way to go.

"There is no excuse for driving faster than you can react to the car in front of you coming to a full stop. None at all."

Not offering this up as an excuse but rather sort of a pattern of behavior.

When I leave lots of room between me and the car in front of me, it invites crazy behavior for people cutting into that big open space. Especially with people that don't know how to merge onto a freeway.

It's sometimes hard to tell if following technically too close is actually safer for that reason.

Note that I've never rear-ended anybody, but I've certainly had some exciting panic stops.

Is there an entity out there trying to solve the design issue around cars? Like, why is it possible to do the erratic behavior you describe when you leave room for the car ahead of you? How can we change the design of either cars or roads to inhibit dangerous behavior? I'm sure most people who read this have driven on an American highway and observe dangerous behaviors from other drivers. It's curious why, as a society, we ignore this as a given for independent transportation.

Where I live people merge onto the freeway as quickly as possible. If I try to merge the "correct" way, people think I'm cheating and will speed up to force me to go have to merge behind them even though they were previously going pretty slow in the right lane.

When people cut into that big open space then I ease off the gas a little and let more room open up between us. Someone else cuts in, and I just keep doing the same. Just because they're going to drive dangerously doesn't mean I have to.

Sure and I guess we get home the next day I suppose. There's being safe and then there's being paranoid. The OP quoted a pile up in Texas during one of the worst winter storms in history as example of not following distance, while the right thing to do on that day would have been to _not drive at all_. Even on normal Christmas mornings which are typically one of the iciest days of the year in Dallas I used to take a bus ride to see how many cars I can count in ditches. Just don't drive in Texas if the roads are icy.

You’ll get home just 30 seconds late. Next time wait for 30 seconds and see how much road you can cover.

Unless you’re stuck in traffic, easing off of gas to allow for 2-3 cars of space ahead of you isn’t even going to be noticeable in your commute time.

> Sure and I guess we get home the next day I suppose.

This is not the logical conclusion of not following too closely behind the car (any car) that happens to be in front of you.

Try driving politely like this some time.

Letting people in isn't going to increase your drive time by more than 5%. Probably closer to 2% on average.

I'm sure those people driving dangerously are just trying to get home a little quicker. I'd rather get home alive.

I'll sacrifice a little extra time commuting to see my family again another day.

If you have distance-maintaining cruise control, you can safely ignore this phenomenon. Also, learn to ignore that little voice in your head that equates being in front of another car with having higher social status.

"Also, learn to ignore that little voice in your head that equates being in front of another car with having higher social status."

It's not that. It's that following a bit closer is arguably less mental work then dealing with the unpredictable encroachments, merging cars pacing you exactly versus speeding up or slowing down to merge, etc.

I have distance-maintaining cruise control. But the quantums of distance go between clearly too close and uncomfortable (and I think there's one closer), or engraved invitation.

The problem with putting out the engraved invitation is it means never passing the big trucks. I don't like following directly behind big trucks because of visibility and fumes. But it you leave a big space, people will keep passing you on the right to get into that space, and then you may as well sit in the right lane behind the truck, because you're not going to pass it.

It's true that some brands have bad distance options. I use the one that's ridiculously far. So far back that I'm never in the stink zone or afraid the automatic brake isn't going to work in time. I'm frustrated when I drive a car without that option.

I used to get annoyed at people cutting me off and used to try to close the gap in front of me.

That is just known as tailgating, it is 100% more dangerous, and the mentality that leads to it is a minor form of road rage -- getting annoyed at other drivers and rationalizing dangerous behavior because of it. And all you're doing is, very definitively, rationalization -- tailgating is never safer. That is a form of "I am very clever and counterintuitive" rationalization or how otherwise fairly smart people wind up making dumb decisions.

If you allow enough space -- which should really be well over a semi-trailer of space -- then you allow people to "cut you off" but everyone is ultimately safer.

You get where you're going at basically exactly the same time as well. Even if you get caught at a light, you'll probably make it up at some other light where you'd never make it anyway because the backup is 2+ lights long anyway (or else you're driving somewhere at some without any traffic and it doesn't matter anyway).

It also greatly helps to just get the fuck out of the left lane entirely and get out of the mentality where you give any fucks over it. That goes equally as to if you are one of the left-lane speed police OR if you're one of the left-lane-is-for-passing police. Both of those people are actually road ragers. Stick with one of the other lanes and open up a nice wide gap in front of you and watch people zip over to the left lane and get into each other's headspaces.

And you'll get to wherever you're going within a minute or two of whatever your maps app predicts.

And often the left lane isn't any faster because half the people think they drive faster than everyone else and zip over there and crowd it up.

> Note that I've never rear-ended anybody, but I've certainly had some exciting panic stops.

I can't remember the last time I ever had an "exciting panic stop". I'm pretty certain I can guess which of us is a generally safer driver. So that should be your answer.

>> a form of "I am very clever and counterintuitive" rationalization

Speaking of a "stupid, hazardous fad," this self-congratulatory twist-of-thought is rampant and dangerous right now.

To wit, from the Atlantic this month:

"The theory that things that improve our safety might provide a false sense of security and lead to reckless behavior is attractive—it’s contrarian and clever, and fits the “here’s something surprising we smart folks thought about” mold that appeals to, well, people who think of themselves as smart." -- Zeynep Tufekci

I may have read that article and thought they nailed it.

I don't think they mean they didn't like leaving the space because people moved into that space, but because they did so in an unsafe manner.

I've observed much the same thing. After a certain distance, you will find people taking extra risks just to find a way into that space. Then once they have managed to weave their way into a position where they can move into that space, they will frequently do so mere feet in front of you. They will not take advantage of the giant space available and simply get in front of you at all costs as fast as possible.

It's really not about somebody getting in front of you, as it is discouraging them from risking their life, yours, and multiple other people's around you, to get into the somewhat larger space available.

That is what I was thinking. Hard to get the benefit of the doubt here sometimes. I actually do mostly leave a big space in front of me. But it is frustrating when that invites crazy behavior.

If I've left more than a semi-trailer of space in front of me, I haven't seen people trying to zip into that space right off my front bumper dangerously.

If you're commonly seeing that, you're likely doing something to antagonize other drivers.

Tailgating in order to prevent that is rationalizing unsafe behavior.

Having to do a panic stop can still happen from a safe distance. The car in front of you might have significantly better brakes and traction. Or someone can pull in front of you and brake before you're able to establish distance. You sure are concluding a lot from one data point.

The need to commonly panic stop is entirely due to tailgating. Eliminating tailgating though can't ever completely eliminate the need to panic stop. But I can't think of any time in the past 30 years that I've needed to panic stop. True accidents do happen, but the majority of time "panic stops" are due to inattention and insufficient stopping distance.

And I'm not going to carefully research something that should be very obvious if you have any experience driving at all. You can go out and talk to a thousand driving instructors and police who will tell you the same thing.

Anecdotes can also be right. You can't prove something wrong by screaming N=1 you can only argue its not proof. So prove my experience wrong with statistics and data (I will bet you that you cannot).

I find that drivers willing to cut into a small gap ahead of me are very likely to change lanes again in 30 seconds. I'm not convinced tailgating saves any time at all.

> Everyone who rear ended the car in front of them was an idiot.

Are you serious? Winter driving is no joke. I sympathise with people in Texas who did not have a daily encouter with snow and ice. When I was in the midwest, I was pretty good at driving on ice, guessing where black ice was etc. I will never forget Jan 25, 2010 in Iowa when I successfully made home - it was literally like driving blindfolded on a glass sheet [1]. Driving north on I-35 at 15 mph. It was one of the proudest achievements of my life.

Hint: if you see an overpass, brake gently before you reach there. You are betting that there won't be black ice below it, and that's not a very safe bet. The steering wheel might buck once on the black ice, but you can recover if you are slow, and you go into the skid rather than against it.

[1] https://siouxcityjournal.com/news/state-and-regional/iowa/ph...

They are not in control of their car if they cannot stop without crashing. Sometimes this requires not driving at all.

You are absolutely right. But if you are on the road, I was saying that it is possible to regain control of the car even if you momentarily skid/slide. I think winter driving definitely takes getting used to, there is no point in blaming drivers who may be encountering this for the first time in their lives.

> Everyone who rear ended the car in front of them was an idiot.

I find this comment baseless and insensitive to those that were killed. The Texas accident was attributed to a failure of road ice management. Bystander video clearly shows vehicles attempting to stop sliding for hundreds of yards on ice.

Agreed, I don't think OP ever tried to figure out what happened in that scenario, just waved it off as dumb drivers, "I would have had different results", rather than the sudden undetectable absolute loss of traction event, which probably wouldn't even have a high chance of being detectable by any fancy Vision/Lidar self-driving algorithms (black ice, no change in contrast).

One could make the argument that the drivers were not aware of the dangers of driving on ice, but then it's a fault of the regulatory body that issues licenses to these people. However, I do think it's the drivers responsibility to assess the road conditions and pick an appropriate speed. Whilst it is a failure of government authorities to not de-ice the roads and spread salt, any driver can at any point in time be caught off guard by terrible weather, and they should be ready to deal with those situations.

Those videos also show people successfully stopping without smashing into the car in front of them, and then getting rear ended by the driver behind them.

There's your baseline.

I’ve never understood how we know from all the research there is that your phone in your hand is a massive distraction while driving.

How is a much bigger screen, that is farther away and brighter and requires you to reach out for it not an even bigger distraction.

Are you referring to the pileup caused by the black ice on the overpass? At those Texan speeds, managing to stop a sixteen wheeler on ice would be a miracle.

Edit: removed part that was saying ABS is useless on ice.

Can you explain how you would be better off without ABS than with it on ice?

Ice is precisely the type of situation ABS is built for.

You are right, a few searches reveal that ABS is supposed to help on ice. I confused another piece of information I read that was saying that ABS is worse on snow, due to not creating that snow wall as the tire digs through the snow, that a locked wheel would allow.

The primary function of ABS is to allow you to keep steering control, rather than "improved braking" (though I guess it could be said that you get 'improved braking' by being able to control it better ie. by being able to also steer away from an object).

It applies equally to snow, wet or dry conditions.

I grew up in an area that 5-8 feet of snow annually and drove old cars in it. Don’t listen to internet nerds arguing about what a super skilled driver can do. A pile of snow pushed in front of a wheel isn’t stopping a car.

After front wheel drive, ABS is one of the major ways to improve winter driving. Not only in snow, but in black ice and similar conditions. The big issue is driving too fast and losing control and going into the ditch or a spin.

ABS makes it easier for you to know you have a problem and to avoid it. It may or may not bring you to a full stop in a shorter timeframe, but it will shed speed so you regain control.

After ABS, all season tires and AWD are the most important enhancements.

> After ABS, all season tires and AWD are the most important enhancements

Agreed. But I would say the proper tires for the conditions is ideal, meaning snow tires in winter.

- ABS for steering control.

- Snow tires in winter ("snow boots for your car").

- AWD (or something adaptive) for traction control.

- Last but not least - driving smart (not speeding, adjusting for conditions, etc.)

Thanks, great points. It's true, ABS can provide helpful feedback. On several occasions I had to abort cornering and keep going straight, because I once the ABS was engaged I knew there's no way I was making the corner (this was low speed on a patch of ice covered by fresh snow).

Also, I find the electronic stability control system extremely useful for detecting black ice. A slight acceleration attempt provides instant feedback if the road is slippery, but not immediately obvious.

> After ABS, all season tires and AWD are the most important enhancements.

And slowing down. A 10% reduction in speed results in ~19% less energy for the brakes to dispel - aka a disproportionately shorter stopping distance.

> At those Texan speeds, managing to stop a sixteen wheeler on ice would be a miracle.

So what you're saying is they should have been going slower due to inclement weather?

It sounds like you aren't familiar with ice driving.

The worst pileup in Texas occurred on one side of an arched overpass. Drivers coming from one direction couldn't see the pileup forming at the bottom until they were already coming down. At such a velocity and slope, there was no recourse. This is in spite of the long distance that remained to the start of the pileup.

For context, ice accumulates on bridges before the rest of the highway.

I once had to report an uber driver for watching a movie on his laptop. Almost scarier than the distraction watching the movie, was that every turn (or swerve) caused the laptop to slide on the dash and he'd reach way over the passenger side to move it back. Scary ride.

> There is no excuse for driving faster than you can react to the car in front of you coming to a full stop. None at all.

The other reply aludes to this, but it's very simple

The easiest way to cause an accident is to behave in an unexpected way

Leave a gap when no one else is? People will cut into the gap and put you and others at risk.

Brake early to increase the space you have? People not paying attention will rear end you expecting you to have braked later.

Drive slower than most traffic to give yourself more reaction time? People will pass you unsafely, and you again run the risk of being rear ended since going slower than people expect is a similar outcome to them coming across an unexpected obstacle.

That's why we see fully autonomous vehicles getting in so many not-at-fault accidents. The most experienced drivers realize there are a lot of unspoken conventions that, for better or worse, people rely on to get from place to place.

Sometimes those backfire like in that pile up, but this isn't really something you fix by being the only person doing otherwise.

You'll quickly find that you're putting yourself at the mercy of other drivers (and yes you won't be at fault, but not being at fault never saved someone in an ICU)

I have one rule when driving: “stay the fuck away from me”. All other rules follow, including leaving tons of space, signaling, passing appropriately. Also includes moving right when someone is too close to me.

I consider myself an extremely safe driver, and I’ve definitely been in way more close calls when someone else was driving than when I was.

I don’t think that logic you’ve proposed really holds in the parts of the US that I’ve lived in (East coast, Midwest).

I driven 80,000 miles between CT, NY and NC with 0 accidents* in the last 3 years (almost 70,000 in two years, COVID obviously put a damper on recreational driving)

Right now I live in NYC and I can tell you leaving tons of space (outside of zipper merges) is just going to leave you slamming your brakes for overaggressive drivers all day, and if you're unlucky someone will hit you or swipe you.

That's not saying you need to tailgate people until you can smell their breath, but the ideal following distance at highway speeds is 6 car lengths at 60 mph for example.

6 car lengths between the car in front of you here would leave people treating you like you have a disabled car, rushing to fill that gap immediately in a mad rush.

It sucks, but at the same time that's how people drive sometimes. To me the safest way to drive is to not to have hard and fast rules you follow regardless of situation, but to adapt to situations quickly.

For example, if trucks start passing me on the left, I'd rather be in a "left-er" lane than the one I'm in, even if it means giving up some of my ability to make space. The action of the truck switching lanes twice in close proximity is creating more risk for me than driving at the same distance the rest of traffic is

-

Also in most pile ups like the one mentioned following distance isn't even the main issue, it's things like target fixation, where you come around the bend see a giant crash and "lock up"

Space will buy you more time to get over the fixation, but I'm willing to bet most people wouldn't be able to handle that in 6 car lengths at 60 mph.

Early in my instruction on performance driving, the thing that created the hairiest situations, even on an closed course with not a single car for another few turns, was always target fixation.

It's not easy to get over, and I feel like a great antidote is to not think in terms of "I have to make space, this space is a safe zone" but "what if this is not a safe zone, what are my options" and continuously think of that

* one accident happened when I was not in the car, parked car got smashed by a driver confusing their pedals

> I don't fiddle with it.

I keep my smartphone with shazam on when I listen to the radio. While moving I'll hear a song and just press the big round button in the middle. The simplest gesture possible on a phone. I noticed that when I do so, even if I make a conscious effort to:

    - keep eyes on the road 100%
    - not even tilt my head to look at the phone
    - don't insist if I miss

even then I can see my brain lose focus of the area around me and somehow only have a mental image of my limb / arm / hand

It seems very unnatural (unless trainable .. can't say) to do those two things at once without turning into a high risk.

> I think they're an awful addition to driver controls.

To make matters worse, they're quickly becoming a full replacement for driver controls rather than an addition in many cars.

> Everyone who rear ended the car in front of them was an idiot.

This comment is against the HN guidelines.

No, it isn't. It is a general criticism of hypothetical behavior. It isn't focused on any particular person or group, much less any particular commentator in this thread. It might be better to say "a poor driver" rather than "an idiot", but that's a style issue rather than one of decorum.

It was the nicest thing I could say to such a disgustingly inhumane comment. Oblib clearly lacks understanding of the Fort Worth incident, but chose to blame the victims anyway. More people died in that collision than live in Bill’s little hamlet, so maybe it’s just a lack of perspective.

They were not poor drivers. Conditions rapidly and invisibly changed in above-freezing temperatures causing a sudden loss of traction. Several professional truck drivers (who likely had prior experience in winter weather) were involved. Anyone would have been helpless in that situation, which is why more than 100 vehicles were.

HAVE SOME FUCKING EMPATHY.

Obviously we don't want the Westboro Baptists picketing any funerals with "Idiot!" signs. We're not in that context now; we're online discussing highway safety. The blizzard was not a surprise to anyone who had seen a weather report in the preceding week. No one is a perfect driver, so it's certainly possible for anyone to take part in a collision. However, it is smart to consider the actual causes of a particular collision, in order to avoid those situations while driving in future.

Several professional truck drivers (who likely had prior experience in winter weather) were involved.

Every time I see something truly stupid on the interstate, a semi truck is involved. Around the same time as Texans were having problems, I passed by a semi truck in a ditch. The two drivers who (or, presumably, one of whom) had missed the entrance to the filling station that dumps sewage into my creek, were wearing long-sleeved T-shirts while they shuffled about watching the warmly-dressed wrecker driver hook up cables and the temperature was in the low twenties. Clearly these guys weren't ready for driving in February.

Empathy is a fine, human thing. In other nations, empathy has led to helpful emergency payments for workers and small businesses who have suffered during the pandemic. In USA we don't have enough empathy for all that. (Maybe $1400, but certainly not $2000.) Still, weather has even less empathy than Congress. E"R"COT are some other Texans who should have known that already.