When the VW New Beetle came out with it's diesel TDI model a few years ago, the message boards were flooded with funny anecdotes about how service station personnel were screaming at the drivers not to put diesel in their tank, even to the extent of shutting down the pumps on sight alone. (Interestingly, the diesel nozzle never would have fit if it had not been intended for diesel.)
Considering diesel-powered passenger cars have been around since the 1970's, I don't think there's any hope left for America.
It means the same thing. Just like "power brakes" means the same thing as "vacuum-assisted hydraulic brakes," because the marketing execs decide some phrase is a catchy selling point, the public uses it, and it eventually becomes commonplace in the industry to refer to it.
Careful, careful... Someone's gonna ask what actually makes a "big block" a big block. And then I'll let you explain it, and how it uniquely applies to all the other manufacturers of internal-combustion engines, right down to the individual series.
Because really, there is not one single part or design that indicates an engine is a "big block" instead of a "small block."
Have you ever been to a strip club? If not, prepare for your mind to be blown:
10-25% of the patrons in any strip club are female. Usually they come in with their significant others, but not always - sometimes they're loners, sometimes they're in a caravan of females (batchelorette parties). I would be willing to guess that per capita, the percentage of women at the event that found it offensive would be the same percentage as the number of men.
That doesn't say whether this event was right or wrong, I'm just saying that I don't believe gender plays that much of a role in it, or that every woman would have been offended by it.
Not trying to be nitpicky, but a footnote in the (single-century old) annals of automotive history says that the first cars used "tillers," as what was needed was a long lever to apply enough torque to a steering shaft that required only a 30 degree or so range of motion. It was unwieldy, but it worked because it was simple, and the worm and sector gearbox had not yet been invented (or at least utilized for that purpose). Once the worm & sector gearbox became the general choice to apply enough torque to a shaft, and the shaft was required to rotate more than 30 degrees to achieve the same purpose, it was obvious that the tiller was no longer an option, and a wheel became the method of rotating the steering shaft.
It's interesting to note that the Wright Bros. developed the airplane about the same time as other inventors were developing the automobile. It would appear that they (the steering wheel and the joystick) were developed separately for their individual requirements: The airplane required applying and removing tension from two cables simultaneously (I believe the original Flyer had one stick for pitch, and a separate stick for roll), whereas very few if any automobiles required simultaneously applying and removing tension from cables for steering purposes.
THEN!, you could even look at traction engines from around the same time period that combine the two ideas for steering simplicity, such as the Garr-Scott, the Huber, and the Mogul.
Technically that only drops air on the trailer side, as the tractor side Maxis would still be pressurized and active. The trailer air release in today's trucks is a red octagon button, and the tractor air release is a yellow diamond. It's red because you'd want the trailer to drag the tractor to a stop in an emergency, rather than the tractor attempting to stop everything and likely jacknifing.
But you're right, that is an emergency brake. And if you hit it, it'd damn well better be an emergency. They don't call it the Magic Button for nothing.
So where is that new technology? I understand both your guys' points, and you're both right.
Back in the day, 200 years ago, some predicted cities would be buried in their own horse manure from all the traffic. Then came gasoline, and within 30 years(!) the horses were gone and along with them went the entire support staff and infrastructure. (Think horse manure haulers, hoof trimmers & shoers, and stagecoach builders.) They adapted to the new technology (like stagecoach builders did) or just ended their way of life and moved on (like hoof trimmers).
So the question is, what will the new technology be? What will replace gasoline, which replaced horses? And how will we deal with the change in infrastructure?
Mod this shiznit up. That's precisely the solution to the problem - move the frequency allocations around so the stuff that NEEDS to go long distance can use the lower frequencies.
The new problem becomes the sloth-like movements of the FCC, and how they'll want to "auction" half of the VHF spectrum. Perhaps someone needs to step in and create new WiFi transceivers for the newly-vacated VHF range and let the masses finally enjoy true WiFi, FCC be damned.
I wondered if that's what those were. I live on the Golden Valley line and never heard anything about it (but then again I don't pay much attention to local news, either).
They sure didn't put them very high - seems like Line Of Sight would have been horrible with all the aluminum siding around.
You bring up an excellent point. Most cheap motels such as Super 8 or Americinn have fair-to-OK free WiFi service available with no login necessary. Nicer places such as Hampton Inns and Holiday Inn Expresses provide it for free, as long as you put your room number into their HTML login page.
However, as soon as you move up to the Sheratons and Ritz-Carltons of the world, expect to pay at least $10 per day of WiFi, the signal and bandwidth of which is no better than the aforementioned Super 8. It is truly an inverse of "you get what you pay for."
It seems like you're concerned about whether or not your idea is justified or desired. Sometimes people don't know they need something until it's put in front of their face, and they instantly realize what they've been missing, and generally say the phrase, "I can't believe I've gone so long without this thing!" Those kind of ideas are what you'd need to discuss with the average person, if even a friend you can trust.
My problem isn't for want of justification of the idea, I just don't know how to go about properly building it. For instance, I know exactly how I'd like to create a unique DC motor, using IGBTs to fire individual coils and a timer for firing the IGBTs, but I don't know enough about the technical aspects: Can IGBTs handle huge inductors of 5-10 Henries? How are IGBTs wired? If I crank this capacitor value up, what happens? That sort of thing. I feel as if I'm going to need an expert to verify that it can be done, almost an electrical engineer.
These maps are very interesting but incredibly inaccurate. My experience with living in the "fringe" of the metro area of Minneapolis/St. Paul is that the analog dividing line is greatly underestimated (perfect reception can be achieved in a circle with a 20-mile greater radius than shown), while the digital line may be fairly accurate. Analog has proven its abilities in the past; digital, being the newcomer, will have big shoes to fill.
I especially despise that my previous neighbors in the fringe are considered "acceptable losses" for some stations in our area - but only stations that broadcast PBS. Of all the programming to crank up the wattage for, PBS would be the highest on my list.
Accepting that we are mortal and that death is inevitable is part of life. For those who don't want to get hurt/be in an accident/die, then don't get out of bed in the morning. Don't get into a car, don't walk outside, etc. The risks one takes for a comfortable lifestyle,... nix that; the risks one takes for maintaining life involve the possibility of dying. You can't have your cake and eat it too, no matter how much anyone says differently. It bothers me how much people fear death. Entire industries are based off of it. People will spend their entire life savings prolonging their own life or the life of a loved one beyond its expectancy, and for what? Nostalgia? No! The fear of the unknown. The fear of death.
I, too, am more concerned about having to live out my life in a wheelchair or missing a limb than I am of dying. I would still do my damndest to become a productive member of society, but failing that, I think I would rather end my own life than become a drain on everyone else, including myself.
I have a '66 Ford Country Squire station wagon that falls into your multi-decade realm. This car has run reliably on MN's required ethanol content of 10%, BUT it required replacing fuel system components that were built with natural rubber, such as the fuel pump diaphragm and short sections of the fuel line. These parts were easily replaced with modern substitutes containing synthetic nitrile rubbers such as Buna-N. However, older vehicles did not depend on many of the rubber and plastic parts found in today's cars; older vehicles used a lot of steel, brass, and aluminum in their fuel systems, which mainly consisted of a fuel pump and carburetor. Today's vehicles usually incorporate 1 plastic fuel injector per cylinder, not to mention that the plastics and rubber components are cheaper to manufacture, which was the ultimate reason for their use.
I'm not sure how you'd make a thermal solar system actually function to move a vehicle along a track. Converting heat expansion into motion is much more limited than using electricity. A stationary electrical supply is easily transferred to a moving vehicle, stationary heated fluids are not. Air will block electricity from escaping a bare wire (to a certain extent), but air will not block liquid from escaping an open pipe. Steam trains operated on the principle that you take your fuel along and heat the fluid as it's needed. Stationary heated fluids would require that the propulsion system remain stationary as well, so now you're building a thermal solar collector AND steam turbines/expansion pumps along 110 miles of track. Then you have to determine a way to transfer the energy into smooth motion applied to the vehicle. (Roller-coaster chain?)
Not saying it can't be done, but it would be really, really inefficient.
Just because our country is fiscally irresponsible, science should take a back seat? How cash-strapped do we have to become before the education of our children gets cut?
Trouble is, everyone's priorities are different. Ask 10 people how we should be fixing the economy and you'll get 20 different answers, because not everyone has the same priorities.
Plus the drawing was terrible, I mean, I could do better in about 20 mins, and I can't draw.
Well, it's not exactly a Rembrandt Paint-By-Number watercolor book; kids who are 5 years old tend to draw like this. They might be able to relate to it better, and color it in quicker, accomplishing more.
But at least you went and actually looked at the book before making an opinion, unlike some people.
I visit a lot of electrical component websites like General Electric, Phoenix Contact and Mouser Electronics. I run FF 3.0.x and NoScript and have sites' scripts disallowed by default. So, when I go to visit a new site that hasn't been whitelisted, it's expected that I will see what I want, but clicking links and searching using a built-in search bar won't function correctly until I whitelist it or temporarily allow it. When I went to visit your site, I didn't see anything except some odd-sized frames. It looked like a very simple site that was built using wrong-sized frames, and I didn't even think to allow scripting. I know absolutely nothing about website design, but if you can build the frames before using scripts in the frames, that would at least allow people using NoScript to see what they've wandered onto.
To me, having basic HTML functioning of a site is much more important than Flash and other script goodies. Make the site work using basic HTML, then add the scripts to do all the cool things. JMHO. Also, any Flash-heavy or Flash-dependent sites at least give me a warning that I need to install the current version of Flash in order to properly view the site. That's my cue as a user to temporarily allow the site. Hope this helps for your feedback.
Slashdot Mirror
When the VW New Beetle came out with it's diesel TDI model a few years ago, the message boards were flooded with funny anecdotes about how service station personnel were screaming at the drivers not to put diesel in their tank, even to the extent of shutting down the pumps on sight alone. (Interestingly, the diesel nozzle never would have fit if it had not been intended for diesel.)
Considering diesel-powered passenger cars have been around since the 1970's, I don't think there's any hope left for America.
Duesenberg didn't think so.
It means the same thing. Just like "power brakes" means the same thing as "vacuum-assisted hydraulic brakes," because the marketing execs decide some phrase is a catchy selling point, the public uses it, and it eventually becomes commonplace in the industry to refer to it.
Girls, you're both pretty.
Careful, careful... Someone's gonna ask what actually makes a "big block" a big block. And then I'll let you explain it, and how it uniquely applies to all the other manufacturers of internal-combustion engines, right down to the individual series.
Because really, there is not one single part or design that indicates an engine is a "big block" instead of a "small block."
No, that would be 1967. I only know this because the folks from the generation that went through it enjoyed my then-new 1967 Ford LTD.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summer_of_love
Have you ever been to a strip club? If not, prepare for your mind to be blown:
10-25% of the patrons in any strip club are female. Usually they come in with their significant others, but not always - sometimes they're loners, sometimes they're in a caravan of females (batchelorette parties). I would be willing to guess that per capita, the percentage of women at the event that found it offensive would be the same percentage as the number of men.
That doesn't say whether this event was right or wrong, I'm just saying that I don't believe gender plays that much of a role in it, or that every woman would have been offended by it.
Not trying to be nitpicky, but a footnote in the (single-century old) annals of automotive history says that the first cars used "tillers," as what was needed was a long lever to apply enough torque to a steering shaft that required only a 30 degree or so range of motion. It was unwieldy, but it worked because it was simple, and the worm and sector gearbox had not yet been invented (or at least utilized for that purpose). Once the worm & sector gearbox became the general choice to apply enough torque to a shaft, and the shaft was required to rotate more than 30 degrees to achieve the same purpose, it was obvious that the tiller was no longer an option, and a wheel became the method of rotating the steering shaft.
It's interesting to note that the Wright Bros. developed the airplane about the same time as other inventors were developing the automobile. It would appear that they (the steering wheel and the joystick) were developed separately for their individual requirements: The airplane required applying and removing tension from two cables simultaneously (I believe the original Flyer had one stick for pitch, and a separate stick for roll), whereas very few if any automobiles required simultaneously applying and removing tension from cables for steering purposes.
THEN!, you could even look at traction engines from around the same time period that combine the two ideas for steering simplicity, such as the Garr-Scott, the Huber, and the Mogul.
Technically that only drops air on the trailer side, as the tractor side Maxis would still be pressurized and active. The trailer air release in today's trucks is a red octagon button, and the tractor air release is a yellow diamond. It's red because you'd want the trailer to drag the tractor to a stop in an emergency, rather than the tractor attempting to stop everything and likely jacknifing.
But you're right, that is an emergency brake. And if you hit it, it'd damn well better be an emergency. They don't call it the Magic Button for nothing.
You know, if they sent 520 people, at least there'd be some_thing_ to do... because there'd be some_one_ to do...
Lame joke, I know, but on a serious note I bet the more people they add to the experiment, the less likely everyone is to go batshit insane.
So where is that new technology? I understand both your guys' points, and you're both right.
Back in the day, 200 years ago, some predicted cities would be buried in their own horse manure from all the traffic. Then came gasoline, and within 30 years(!) the horses were gone and along with them went the entire support staff and infrastructure. (Think horse manure haulers, hoof trimmers & shoers, and stagecoach builders.) They adapted to the new technology (like stagecoach builders did) or just ended their way of life and moved on (like hoof trimmers).
So the question is, what will the new technology be? What will replace gasoline, which replaced horses? And how will we deal with the change in infrastructure?
Mod this shiznit up. That's precisely the solution to the problem - move the frequency allocations around so the stuff that NEEDS to go long distance can use the lower frequencies.
The new problem becomes the sloth-like movements of the FCC, and how they'll want to "auction" half of the VHF spectrum. Perhaps someone needs to step in and create new WiFi transceivers for the newly-vacated VHF range and let the masses finally enjoy true WiFi, FCC be damned.
I wondered if that's what those were. I live on the Golden Valley line and never heard anything about it (but then again I don't pay much attention to local news, either).
They sure didn't put them very high - seems like Line Of Sight would have been horrible with all the aluminum siding around.
You bring up an excellent point. Most cheap motels such as Super 8 or Americinn have fair-to-OK free WiFi service available with no login necessary. Nicer places such as Hampton Inns and Holiday Inn Expresses provide it for free, as long as you put your room number into their HTML login page.
However, as soon as you move up to the Sheratons and Ritz-Carltons of the world, expect to pay at least $10 per day of WiFi, the signal and bandwidth of which is no better than the aforementioned Super 8. It is truly an inverse of "you get what you pay for."
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=BSOD
It seems like you're concerned about whether or not your idea is justified or desired. Sometimes people don't know they need something until it's put in front of their face, and they instantly realize what they've been missing, and generally say the phrase, "I can't believe I've gone so long without this thing!" Those kind of ideas are what you'd need to discuss with the average person, if even a friend you can trust.
My problem isn't for want of justification of the idea, I just don't know how to go about properly building it. For instance, I know exactly how I'd like to create a unique DC motor, using IGBTs to fire individual coils and a timer for firing the IGBTs, but I don't know enough about the technical aspects: Can IGBTs handle huge inductors of 5-10 Henries? How are IGBTs wired? If I crank this capacitor value up, what happens? That sort of thing. I feel as if I'm going to need an expert to verify that it can be done, almost an electrical engineer.
If this is your problem, we're in the same boat.
Were you saying something similar from 1961 through 1968?
But auctioning off airwaves is.
These maps are very interesting but incredibly inaccurate. My experience with living in the "fringe" of the metro area of Minneapolis/St. Paul is that the analog dividing line is greatly underestimated (perfect reception can be achieved in a circle with a 20-mile greater radius than shown), while the digital line may be fairly accurate. Analog has proven its abilities in the past; digital, being the newcomer, will have big shoes to fill.
I especially despise that my previous neighbors in the fringe are considered "acceptable losses" for some stations in our area - but only stations that broadcast PBS. Of all the programming to crank up the wattage for, PBS would be the highest on my list.
+1.
... nix that; the risks one takes for maintaining life involve the possibility of dying. You can't have your cake and eat it too, no matter how much anyone says differently. It bothers me how much people fear death. Entire industries are based off of it. People will spend their entire life savings prolonging their own life or the life of a loved one beyond its expectancy, and for what? Nostalgia? No! The fear of the unknown. The fear of death.
Accepting that we are mortal and that death is inevitable is part of life. For those who don't want to get hurt/be in an accident/die, then don't get out of bed in the morning. Don't get into a car, don't walk outside, etc. The risks one takes for a comfortable lifestyle,
I, too, am more concerned about having to live out my life in a wheelchair or missing a limb than I am of dying. I would still do my damndest to become a productive member of society, but failing that, I think I would rather end my own life than become a drain on everyone else, including myself.
I have a '66 Ford Country Squire station wagon that falls into your multi-decade realm. This car has run reliably on MN's required ethanol content of 10%, BUT it required replacing fuel system components that were built with natural rubber, such as the fuel pump diaphragm and short sections of the fuel line. These parts were easily replaced with modern substitutes containing synthetic nitrile rubbers such as Buna-N. However, older vehicles did not depend on many of the rubber and plastic parts found in today's cars; older vehicles used a lot of steel, brass, and aluminum in their fuel systems, which mainly consisted of a fuel pump and carburetor. Today's vehicles usually incorporate 1 plastic fuel injector per cylinder, not to mention that the plastics and rubber components are cheaper to manufacture, which was the ultimate reason for their use.
I'm not sure how you'd make a thermal solar system actually function to move a vehicle along a track. Converting heat expansion into motion is much more limited than using electricity. A stationary electrical supply is easily transferred to a moving vehicle, stationary heated fluids are not. Air will block electricity from escaping a bare wire (to a certain extent), but air will not block liquid from escaping an open pipe. Steam trains operated on the principle that you take your fuel along and heat the fluid as it's needed. Stationary heated fluids would require that the propulsion system remain stationary as well, so now you're building a thermal solar collector AND steam turbines/expansion pumps along 110 miles of track. Then you have to determine a way to transfer the energy into smooth motion applied to the vehicle. (Roller-coaster chain?)
Not saying it can't be done, but it would be really, really inefficient.
I'm not sure what all the people do down there.
Snow birds from the upper Midwest are absorbing the heat and spending their retirement money.
Uh you forgot Alaska,USA, which is significantly bigger than Texas,USA. (and also Canada,USA which is even bigger)
Yeah. Not yet. Give it a couple of years and some WMDs.
And that's science's fault... how?
Just because our country is fiscally irresponsible, science should take a back seat? How cash-strapped do we have to become before the education of our children gets cut?
Trouble is, everyone's priorities are different. Ask 10 people how we should be fixing the economy and you'll get 20 different answers, because not everyone has the same priorities.
Plus the drawing was terrible, I mean, I could do better in about 20 mins, and I can't draw.
Well, it's not exactly a Rembrandt Paint-By-Number watercolor book; kids who are 5 years old tend to draw like this. They might be able to relate to it better, and color it in quicker, accomplishing more.
But at least you went and actually looked at the book before making an opinion, unlike some people.
I visit a lot of electrical component websites like General Electric, Phoenix Contact and Mouser Electronics. I run FF 3.0.x and NoScript and have sites' scripts disallowed by default. So, when I go to visit a new site that hasn't been whitelisted, it's expected that I will see what I want, but clicking links and searching using a built-in search bar won't function correctly until I whitelist it or temporarily allow it. When I went to visit your site, I didn't see anything except some odd-sized frames. It looked like a very simple site that was built using wrong-sized frames, and I didn't even think to allow scripting. I know absolutely nothing about website design, but if you can build the frames before using scripts in the frames, that would at least allow people using NoScript to see what they've wandered onto.
To me, having basic HTML functioning of a site is much more important than Flash and other script goodies. Make the site work using basic HTML, then add the scripts to do all the cool things. JMHO. Also, any Flash-heavy or Flash-dependent sites at least give me a warning that I need to install the current version of Flash in order to properly view the site. That's my cue as a user to temporarily allow the site. Hope this helps for your feedback.