'75 El Camino with a seriously overbuilt 327, 2.56:1 rear end, and 28.5" tires. I hit 6400 RPMs in the 1:1 top gear. With 0 drivetrain slippage and no tire expansion, that calculates to 212 MPH. Though, there was almost certainly some slippage. If you figure in 10% RPM loss through the transmission coupling, then the input to the tranny would be turning 5760 RPMs, which is 190 MPH.
I had several miles of straight road to build up the speed. I've buried 140 MPH and 160 MPH speedometers before in other cars, and this was definitely significantly faster. I'd believe anything from 170 (20% slippage) to 200 based just on feel. In the lower gears, the speedometer indicated just a couple percent slippage at over 6K RPMs, so I think 10% is a pretty reasonable worst-case.
Unfortunately, turning the engine that hard is extremely bad on it when it blows the rear intake seal out, causing the engine to lose 5 of its 6 quarts of oil. I've never seen bearings so badly killed, and it melted the nylon inserts out of the rocker arm adjusting nuts. Ugh. The car now runs a much more streetable 350 (dynoed at 412 HP at the flywheel) with 3.42:1 gears.
No, it's illegal to stomp on your brakes just to "punish" someone for driving too closely. Slowing down safely is fine, as is "stopping suddenly because I could swear that an animal was about to run into the road!":)
5 years ago, I wrote command-line compatible replacements for useradd/userdel/passwd. Then I abandoned LDAP and didn't finish the parts of the programs which were unimplemented (things like enabling usermod to work, and writing chage/chsh).:) I seem to recall there being a web-based password changer written around the same time. I'd be surprised if someone didn't have better stuff by now.
Note, that's perl written by someone without a lot of perl experience at the time, so it could well be the stereotypical unreadable stuff.:) I should really look at it again one day and probably clean it up... Add one more thing to my "when spare time comes" list.
I'm a big fan of slowing to a stop in the road. They'll generally pass before you completely stop. If they get out instead, it's not like it's a big deal to take back off and get the heck out of there before they can get back into their car. Or hit the brake pedal just enough to turn the lights on while accelerating away, then if they catch back up, shift down a gear or two in order to slow down without any brake lights. That seems to really piss people off.:)
That said, brake checking is illegal - you'll get a ticket for reckless driving (or similar) to match their "following too closely" ticket. Well, depending on how smooth the other party is when the cops arrive, anyway...
It's almost always based on the tire. An S-rated tire (which is what most "regular" tires are rated at) is good for 112 MPH, which, not coincidentally, is within a MPH or two of where most common cars shut off. The S-rating is generally used because it's a good compromise between ride quality and handling. Sometimes you'll see a T-rating, which is 118 MPH. You'll see H or V on "performance" family cars, which handle better (all other factors being the same) and are higher-speed rated, but have a harsher ride - they're 130 and 149 MPH respectively.
Amusingly, Z-rated tires are just good for "more than 149 MPH", but there's no specification for how far. So, Z-rated generally is taken to mean 150. W (168) and Y (186) exist now.
It's worth noting that those ratings are minimum sustained speed. I've run S-rated tires to over 190 MPH before, when I was too stupid to consider my tires (but smart enough to pick a straight, unpopulated rural road with excelent visibility). I now run V-rated tires on everything, since I've grown out of the "drive as fast as the car will go" thing, but I haven't yet convinced myself that I'll never have a compelling reason to double or triple the speed limit. I think that's due to the same part of a guy's brain that thinks "if I really wanted to, I could go live with monks and train to be a super-badass martial arts guy"[1] and things along those lines.
[1] paraphrased from something I read somewhere one time, to half give credit.
As far as familiarity with the road goes, 1) have you never seen the "curve ahead"-type signs used when there's something unexpected ahead? and 2) the 85th percentile would take into account infrequent users of the road, who - if driving safely - would likely pull the average down. I'm no prude with speed (I've driven an estimated 198MPH previously, and have buried a 140MPH speedo on more than one occasion), but I won't overdrive a road. If I don't know what's ahead, I drive at a speed the I feel is safe - which is generally below what someone who knew the road would drive, and I think reflects the majority of drivers.
Much like anything else, people who drive like maniacs on unfamiliar roads seem to be more like a "vocal minority". We notice them, because they stand out, but rarely notice someone behaving sensibly.:) At least, that's my theory...
Well, you could run a stable kernel on a well-supported platform, and understand that you generally don't have to upgrade to the latest bleeding-edge kernel for your system to work just fine, because the updates generally don't apply to your hardware...
I'm not sure why an OpenMosix-like system couldn't be used to migrate processes to a new kernel image and then cause the old kernel to terminate, either. That'd work with two machines, migrating processes off to one machine and then back again. I think. I'll bet there are situations where Windows can't completely restore state, though.
Grossly misspelled "prey", too. Though, I suppose it's possible that they pray for more people to wlak in with "gullible" written on their foreheads...:)
Do a gogle search for "breach of peace", possibly in conjuntion with "reposession". They can't take your car from a locked garage or against your protest, basically. This is because you own the car, not the bank. The bank (generally) may seize it from you on default, which pretty much implies that it's yours unless they take it.
As long as they tell me how to do the leeching, I can't say that I give a damn. In fact, I'd buy one, and I don't really even need a new printer too badly. My computer has a processor capable of doing way more than I ask from it, asking it to control a printer wouldn't be a big strain.
You didn't pay for all that software. You paid for one license to use the software. If you paid for it, you'd be able to redstribute as many copies as you want, and charge money for that. But no, the company that *made* the software paid for it. I'm pretty confident that it took more than $200 to make Windows XP, and that you only paid a small fraction of that cost.
Compare that to a car or box of cereal, which you pay for in entirety, plus a profit margin.
I have to use Windows to run Outlook to get Exchange mail (no, IMAP's not enabled, now will it be, and Evolution's support won't work). I guess I could technically get another job, or get fired from this one because I never check my work email...
Presumably this grants me license to moan about Windows?
I was threatened with several tickets for riding my mower on the street once. Then again, it was this mower (yeah, I'm riding it in the street for that picture, too).
Besides, the existance of faster/more convenient means don't make walking or horseback impractical. There are lots of places where people primarily walk, and those cities "out West" didn't get populated by people driving their cars from the East.... Flying a personal jet would be even faster / more convenient than driving, but that's out of reach for most people. Does that mean that driving's impactical, just because a personal jet would be better for cross-country trips?:)
Why would lack of a soul imply evil? Couldn't a soulless beast be good just as easily? It's not like something with no soul should be concerned about staying out of hell after death or anything, and life is often easier overall if one does "good" things (people like you and are less likely to want to kill you / protect you) than "evil" (lots of enemies doesn't make for an easy life, even for a sheep)...:)
I watched some show where they were answering the question of whether or not guys shoudl wash their hands after they pee, which is related. I mean, I'm not peeing on my hands, and urine is actually very sterile anyway (it's just fine to drink, supposedly, after removing the minerals which would dehydrate you). The problem is that, presumably, most people wear pants and underwear generally keeping an already warm area quite warm - and therfore quite hospitible to bacterial growth. Given that there's always at least one orifice down there where some really nasty bacteria (when taken out of their native environment, anyway) live and breed, this results in a pretty good population at most any given time. And unless you're showering with bleach / alcohol, you're not killing them all. If you are, you probably have some serious skin problems by now - but I digress. Merely using some hot water and passing over with a soapy hand / rag isn't enough to really clean things up (I think the people that really scrub the heck out of their butts are probably in the minority, but maybe that's just a misconception based no growing up when "grunge" rock was popular). That's why hospitals use autoclaves and alcohol, as opopsed to just rinsing things off. IMHO, if rinsing isn't enough to make a smooth piece of stainless steel clean, it stands to reason that it's even less effective no a pourus surface covered with hair.:)
Were they using that ass-backwards definition of "clean" as "absolute count of bacteria present"? Sounds that way. There's lots fo bacteria on my face, on my tongue, etc. Most of it's beneficial or benign. I guarantee that you're more likely to get sick from licking an ass crack or toilet seat than you are from kissing a person on the cheek.
Heh, three asses in a single post - right up there with the crazy doctor on South Park.
The problem isn't that the comments take up space - comments are not included in the bytecode generated by any sane compiler/assembler/etc-er. The problem is that, since there's no tmuch space, the OP can't use algorithms which would be more clear so as to not require such commenting. To save space, there must be some convoluted algorithms whose purpose would not neccesarily need commenting on a PC, but due to their relative complexity in implementation on a microcontroller, they *do* require commenting.
Of course, *my* PIC assembler never needs commenting - it's always crystal clear.;)
Slashdot Mirror
'75 El Camino with a seriously overbuilt 327, 2.56:1 rear end, and 28.5" tires. I hit 6400 RPMs in the 1:1 top gear. With 0 drivetrain slippage and no tire expansion, that calculates to 212 MPH. Though, there was almost certainly some slippage. If you figure in 10% RPM loss through the transmission coupling, then the input to the tranny would be turning 5760 RPMs, which is 190 MPH.
I had several miles of straight road to build up the speed. I've buried 140 MPH and 160 MPH speedometers before in other cars, and this was definitely significantly faster. I'd believe anything from 170 (20% slippage) to 200 based just on feel. In the lower gears, the speedometer indicated just a couple percent slippage at over 6K RPMs, so I think 10% is a pretty reasonable worst-case.
Unfortunately, turning the engine that hard is extremely bad on it when it blows the rear intake seal out, causing the engine to lose 5 of its 6 quarts of oil. I've never seen bearings so badly killed, and it melted the nylon inserts out of the rocker arm adjusting nuts. Ugh. The car now runs a much more streetable 350 (dynoed at 412 HP at the flywheel) with 3.42:1 gears.
No, it's illegal to stomp on your brakes just to "punish" someone for driving too closely. Slowing down safely is fine, as is "stopping suddenly because I could swear that an animal was about to run into the road!" :)
5 years ago, I wrote command-line compatible replacements for useradd/userdel/passwd. Then I abandoned LDAP and didn't finish the parts of the programs which were unimplemented (things like enabling usermod to work, and writing chage/chsh). :) I seem to recall there being a web-based password changer written around the same time. I'd be surprised if someone didn't have better stuff by now.
:) I should really look at it again one day and probably clean it up... Add one more thing to my "when spare time comes" list.
Note, that's perl written by someone without a lot of perl experience at the time, so it could well be the stereotypical unreadable stuff.
I'm a big fan of slowing to a stop in the road. They'll generally pass before you completely stop. If they get out instead, it's not like it's a big deal to take back off and get the heck out of there before they can get back into their car. Or hit the brake pedal just enough to turn the lights on while accelerating away, then if they catch back up, shift down a gear or two in order to slow down without any brake lights. That seems to really piss people off. :)
That said, brake checking is illegal - you'll get a ticket for reckless driving (or similar) to match their "following too closely" ticket. Well, depending on how smooth the other party is when the cops arrive, anyway...
It's almost always based on the tire. An S-rated tire (which is what most "regular" tires are rated at) is good for 112 MPH, which, not coincidentally, is within a MPH or two of where most common cars shut off. The S-rating is generally used because it's a good compromise between ride quality and handling. Sometimes you'll see a T-rating, which is 118 MPH. You'll see H or V on "performance" family cars, which handle better (all other factors being the same) and are higher-speed rated, but have a harsher ride - they're 130 and 149 MPH respectively.
Amusingly, Z-rated tires are just good for "more than 149 MPH", but there's no specification for how far. So, Z-rated generally is taken to mean 150. W (168) and Y (186) exist now.
It's worth noting that those ratings are minimum sustained speed. I've run S-rated tires to over 190 MPH before, when I was too stupid to consider my tires (but smart enough to pick a straight, unpopulated rural road with excelent visibility). I now run V-rated tires on everything, since I've grown out of the "drive as fast as the car will go" thing, but I haven't yet convinced myself that I'll never have a compelling reason to double or triple the speed limit. I think that's due to the same part of a guy's brain that thinks "if I really wanted to, I could go live with monks and train to be a super-badass martial arts guy"[1] and things along those lines.
[1] paraphrased from something I read somewhere one time, to half give credit.
As far as familiarity with the road goes, 1) have you never seen the "curve ahead"-type signs used when there's something unexpected ahead? and 2) the 85th percentile would take into account infrequent users of the road, who - if driving safely - would likely pull the average down. I'm no prude with speed (I've driven an estimated 198MPH previously, and have buried a 140MPH speedo on more than one occasion), but I won't overdrive a road. If I don't know what's ahead, I drive at a speed the I feel is safe - which is generally below what someone who knew the road would drive, and I think reflects the majority of drivers.
:) At least, that's my theory...
Much like anything else, people who drive like maniacs on unfamiliar roads seem to be more like a "vocal minority". We notice them, because they stand out, but rarely notice someone behaving sensibly.
http://linux-hotplug.sourceforge.net/, particularly http://linux-hotplug.sourceforge.net/kernel/kernel .html would be helpful.
Compaq hotplug PCI has beein in the kernel since 2.4.15, BTW, and those PC cards in laptops (Cardbus) have been supported since before that (IIRC).
Well, you could run a stable kernel on a well-supported platform, and understand that you generally don't have to upgrade to the latest bleeding-edge kernel for your system to work just fine, because the updates generally don't apply to your hardware...
I'm not sure why an OpenMosix-like system couldn't be used to migrate processes to a new kernel image and then cause the old kernel to terminate, either. That'd work with two machines, migrating processes off to one machine and then back again. I think. I'll bet there are situations where Windows can't completely restore state, though.
For some reason I read that post with Grandpa Simpson's vioce in my head, as in "So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time..."
The seasoned sysadmin still needs the man pages - some of us actually *read* those things...
Though, for Apache, I'd be using something along the lines of http://google.com/search?q=site:apache.org+reload
Grossly misspelled "prey", too. Though, I suppose it's possible that they pray for more people to wlak in with "gullible" written on their foreheads... :)
Law at work?
Do a gogle search for "breach of peace", possibly in conjuntion with "reposession". They can't take your car from a locked garage or against your protest, basically. This is because you own the car, not the bank. The bank (generally) may seize it from you on default, which pretty much implies that it's yours unless they take it.
As long as they tell me how to do the leeching, I can't say that I give a damn. In fact, I'd buy one, and I don't really even need a new printer too badly. My computer has a processor capable of doing way more than I ask from it, asking it to control a printer wouldn't be a big strain.
You didn't pay for all that software. You paid for one license to use the software. If you paid for it, you'd be able to redstribute as many copies as you want, and charge money for that. But no, the company that *made* the software paid for it. I'm pretty confident that it took more than $200 to make Windows XP, and that you only paid a small fraction of that cost.
Compare that to a car or box of cereal, which you pay for in entirety, plus a profit margin.
I have to use Windows to run Outlook to get Exchange mail (no, IMAP's not enabled, now will it be, and Evolution's support won't work). I guess I could technically get another job, or get fired from this one because I never check my work email...
Presumably this grants me license to moan about Windows?
I was threatened with several tickets for riding my mower on the street once. Then again, it was this mower (yeah, I'm riding it in the street for that picture, too).
:)
Besides, the existance of faster/more convenient means don't make walking or horseback impractical. There are lots of places where people primarily walk, and those cities "out West" didn't get populated by people driving their cars from the East.... Flying a personal jet would be even faster / more convenient than driving, but that's out of reach for most people. Does that mean that driving's impactical, just because a personal jet would be better for cross-country trips?
I figured *you* didn't believe it. I was just asking in general - why do religious folks believe that no soul == evil?
Why would lack of a soul imply evil? Couldn't a soulless beast be good just as easily? It's not like something with no soul should be concerned about staying out of hell after death or anything, and life is often easier overall if one does "good" things (people like you and are less likely to want to kill you / protect you) than "evil" (lots of enemies doesn't make for an easy life, even for a sheep)... :)
I watched some show where they were answering the question of whether or not guys shoudl wash their hands after they pee, which is related. I mean, I'm not peeing on my hands, and urine is actually very sterile anyway (it's just fine to drink, supposedly, after removing the minerals which would dehydrate you). The problem is that, presumably, most people wear pants and underwear generally keeping an already warm area quite warm - and therfore quite hospitible to bacterial growth. Given that there's always at least one orifice down there where some really nasty bacteria (when taken out of their native environment, anyway) live and breed, this results in a pretty good population at most any given time. And unless you're showering with bleach / alcohol, you're not killing them all. If you are, you probably have some serious skin problems by now - but I digress. Merely using some hot water and passing over with a soapy hand / rag isn't enough to really clean things up (I think the people that really scrub the heck out of their butts are probably in the minority, but maybe that's just a misconception based no growing up when "grunge" rock was popular). That's why hospitals use autoclaves and alcohol, as opopsed to just rinsing things off. IMHO, if rinsing isn't enough to make a smooth piece of stainless steel clean, it stands to reason that it's even less effective no a pourus surface covered with hair. :)
Look, you stand way more of a chance of getting a disease from sitting on a public toilet than you do from a highly scrutinized tissue transplant.
:p
Precisely why I refuse to crap in public restrooms. I'll hold it 'till I get home, thanks.
Were they using that ass-backwards definition of "clean" as "absolute count of bacteria present"? Sounds that way. There's lots fo bacteria on my face, on my tongue, etc. Most of it's beneficial or benign. I guarantee that you're more likely to get sick from licking an ass crack or toilet seat than you are from kissing a person on the cheek.
Heh, three asses in a single post - right up there with the crazy doctor on South Park.
I think we should get the "business" out of the healthcare business before we worry about whether or not the government should be involved. :)
Hooray for hospitals' ability to lose money even when healthcare is outrageously expensive!
The problem isn't that the comments take up space - comments are not included in the bytecode generated by any sane compiler/assembler/etc-er. The problem is that, since there's no tmuch space, the OP can't use algorithms which would be more clear so as to not require such commenting. To save space, there must be some convoluted algorithms whose purpose would not neccesarily need commenting on a PC, but due to their relative complexity in implementation on a microcontroller, they *do* require commenting.
;)
Of course, *my* PIC assembler never needs commenting - it's always crystal clear.