Nice to know I am not the only person who drives a vehicle until it doesn't move under its own power any more. The tech I would like in a vehicle entertainment system would be:
AM radio
FM radio
Weather band radio
3.5mm aux port
A mode for displaying OBDII data and error codes
This kind of thing is simple, cheap, reliable, useful and not flashy hence why it will never be included. I don't drive my car to be entertained (well I actually do but when doing that I don't have the radio on when going around the track) I drive it to go somewhere and to be able to listen to news, music, or hear a weather forecast on my drive is nice. The ODBII functionality would be nice but unless you work on cars you probably don't care, and if you do then you probably have a scan tool that will get some or all of the provided data.
A standard 3.5mm aux port would have been a pretty standard connection and back then connecting a portable CD player was something that was done frequently and most of the time using the awful cassette adapter. The whole process would have been much easier if auto makers had just used a standard 3.5mm jack instead. As an added bonus you could now connect your modern phone, ipod, etc. through that as well since they all still have a 3.5mm jack for connecting headphones.
Well to be fair when you have a feed lot with 1000 head of cattle on it packed in nose to nose like sardines knee deep in their own filth there is a good reason to pump them full of antibiotics. The antibiotics don't make the animals grow faster but enable the conditions to fatten them up quicker. The steroids they give them also help them grow quicker and larger as well.
The maximum theoretical efficiency of an internal combustion engine is actually much higher.
Since they are a heat engine the carnot cycle is the correct model to use so the formula 1-tC/tH is what we need to determine maximum theoretical efficiency. Lets assume it is a hot day with outside temps around 125F (325 Kelvin) this will be our cold side or tC, this only makes things look worse for me unless you live in the south west US at the moment. A quick search also indicates that at standard pressure in open air (not compressed at a ratio of 8:1 or greater like in most vehicles and also contained) that gasoline burns at around 1950C (2223 Kelvin), which would be an underestimate for the temp inside the engine so it makes things look worse for me, so we now have our hot side or tH. Now plug in the numbers and we get a maximum theoretical efficiency of 1-325/2223=.8538 or over 85% which is substantially higher than the numbers I provided.
Yes I know electric motors get real world efficiencies higher than that with good ones getting above 95% and that even crappy electric motors are above 70% efficient. Also the numbers I provided were real world numbers from around 2000 that were done as part of a study by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries in looking into how to get even greater efficiency out of diesel engines. If you want really efficient ICEs we need higher compression ratios, lower friction internal parts, heads and blocks that transfer heat less quickly out of the cylinder (maybe some sort of ceramic liners or larger per cylinder displacement), lower reciprocating mass, and better more dynamic tuning of engines. Granted higher compression ratios are bad for the environment with the NOx emissions they generate but the modern 3 way cat does a fairly good job of eliminating them.
A better question is what is the idle capacity at night when the demand is low and would that idle capacity be enough to charge all vehicles? From what I have read on the subject is by charging overnight there really wouldn't be much if any need for additional capacity as so much of our generating capacity sits idle overnight (spinning but not producing as it costs a lot of money to cold start a generator). The same is probably true of other developed countries like in western Europe. Also if we needed to add a new plant it would be capable of charging 3x the vehicles as we have enough capacity to run society already so the new plant would charge 3 shifts of vehicles for 8 hours each every day. Also my estimate of the number of vehicles that could be charged overnight is under by a lot as the 225 KWh that I stated each vehicle consumed is about the equivalent of the extractable energy (by a standard internal combustion gasoline engine) of 25 gallons of gasoline which is an absurd amount of fuel to consume in 1.5 hours unless you are driving something like a big rig or OHV earth mover hence why I stated it was a substantial under estimate of the number of vehicles that could be charged overnight.
Serious question how do you measure how dangerous something is?
If going by body count then I believe the Kalashnikov line of firearms is probably the leader (I remember reading that it had killed more people than every other firearm) for weapons. Now when you get to silly arguments like the number of possible people that could be harmed or killed (everyone could be harmed or killed by just about anything) then everything is about equal.
you would end up with a power plant for every 1000 people or something silly
No. If we use use some reasonable numbers we can figure this out:
Lets use the reasonable value of 1 hp =.75 KW (this is really close and an easy to use value)
Also lets assume the average vehicle's engine produces 200 horse power or 150 KW (a reasonable value)
Let's also assume an average total vehicle running time per day of 1.5 hours
So in a worst case scenario where the vehicles were consuming peak power the entire time they were running (I am going for worst case here to show how absurd your statement) they would consume 225 KWh per vehicle.
Now since we don't need to charge a vehicle overnight in 1 hour and instead could charge it for 8 hours the power supplied to each vehicle would need to be about 29 KW (rounded up).
Now lets look at a reasonable sized power plant with an output of 1GW (reasonable size coal, natural gas, or a small nuke plant).
That 1GW plant could charge about 34,000 vehicles overnight.
That is hardly a silly value and that is using some absurd input values to make it look as bad as possible. Do you really drive a vehicle with it floored and only vary the brakes even when stopped but the vehicle is running? If we went to a more reasonable power usage instead of assuming that a vehicle always outputs it's peak power you could probably expect that value to increase by a factor of 3 to 5 and still be under estimating.
Typically the modern road vehicle gasoline engines sit in the 25%-30% range now, diesels are in the 30%-35% range and massive low RPM marine diesels are above 50%. The only thing that beats the massive marine diesels is the combined cycle gas turbines but that is only when their waste heat is being utilized, if not they are pretty close to the marine diesels in efficiency.
But they get to wave their envirocock here on/. since the electrons coming to their house are certified to come from a pure and green source which has to count for something.
I never have understood this belief that paying extra for power because it supposedly comes from green sources. The grid has no idea where your electrons came from (lets ignore the markets and generation control sides as those only affect the input power not consumed power) and really doesn't care. The power grid sees electron sources and demand for those electrons and just moves them in the most efficient manner from supply to demand and the "green energy" people are paying for probably came from the closest operational power plant taking the most direct route. As you point out there are green/renewable energy mandates and I doubt that the total power consumed by people who pay extra for the "100% renewable" power is even close to the mandated percentage of renewable power being generated so it really is a scam.
None the engine would still produce the same amount of power for a given amount of fuel.
Now ignoring my snarky comment this should be fairly easy to figure out if we can get the right data. We would need to know the rolling resistance of the vehicle at the different weights (with and without batteries/electric motors) since that will be the driver of difference once at speed. Also we would need to know the power to weight ratio of the hybrid with it's hybrid components and without them to figure out if it since that will be a big determination of how it accelerates in each case. I know know the physics that would be needed (it has been too long since I have done these types of problems) but I would imagine that there would be a slight benefit from having the hybrid. Now granted hybrids typically have smaller engines than their non hybrid versions since a big engine is only needed when getting up to speed so expect your non hybrid hybrid to accelerate like a dog (think Yugo).
I keep hearing how we have basically maximized ICE since there has been about 100 years (actually getting close to 140 now) of development on them. Yet when I look at even modern ones there seems to be a lot that could still be done that isn't being done every where. Some things that come to mind:
Go to electronic valves and get rid of the cam(s)
Higher compression ratios (needs direct injection), and not the gaming of it that Toyota does with their Atkinson cycle engines
More use of the Atkinson cycle instead of the Otto cycle
More direct injection (this finally seems to be happening)
Light weight pistons (forged aluminum alloy) and rods (titanium alloy)
Electric water pumps
Electric AC compressors
Electric power steering pumps
Low friction coatings (nitrides and DLC)
Multiple spark plugs (racers have been doing this for years)
Higher boost forced induction
Granted these won't see the massive improvements that other technology has but there still is plenty of room for improvement.
The power for the AC compressor comes from the engine transferred there by the belt. Granted there is the electric AC compressor clutch but that is so little energy as to not be worth mentioning. What I would like to see is is a hydraulic hybrid vehicle. It seems like they would be more robust and lighter system than the standard electric hybrids but they aren't as sexy either.
For better electric motors we need more powerful magnets and better conductors. Both would allow for smaller and lighter motors at the same output power which means hauling around less mass and greater range.
What coal plants are you looking at, they have gotten better over the last 40 years. If what you are saying it correct then we should be replacing all coal plants with more efficient large low speed marine diesels which get just over 50% efficiency. Also the 17% seem specious for vehicle sized internal combustion engines as typically numbers I see quoted are around 25-30%.
When looking at stationary power generation efficiency matters but less than cost per output power. The biggest environmental benefit of late has been low natural gas prices which have brought the cost of power from gas generation down below that of coal. As an added benefit those combine cycle gas turbines have a higher efficiency than the coal ones and they also release less CO2 per until power than coal does.
Here is a paper done in the early 2000s looking at engine efficiencies that should provide some more reasonable values for engine efficiencies but is probably on the low side given that there has been almost 15 years of advancement since it was published.
From what I have seen of large open pit mines (the northern Minnesota iron mines) the barren land is where they are actively doing mining operations not the surronding areas. The piles of overburden aren't an issue as trees seem to love to grow on a giant pile of topsoil. The tailings fields/ponds may be different for nickle than for iron but I wouldn't think it would be radically different as it isn't like gold mining where they use arsenic on talings fields to get as much gold as possible. You can clearly see the large iron mines up in northern Minnesota from space and they are huge holes in the ground but the native vegetation grows all around them without issue.
Well those large mining machines are starting to go electric although they typically have a large stationary generator (several KV supply) and a tether for the slower moving ones. You have the giant shovels which are electric, truly massive bucket wheel excavators which are electric, even the haul trucks now are going to electric drive (CAT is still mechanical drive on some of their trucks but they are more efficient than their competition) although the haul trucks carry their generator with them but there has been work to have them run from overhead lines as well. The engines in the generators (and haul trucks) are the high efficiency diesels that are similar to the ones used in stationary power generation so it probably won't be long until they can be powered from a remote electric supply if they aren't already.
I used program manager for a while on Win95 but then as I learned more of the explorer shell I eventually converted to it. I would switch back to it from time to time for shits and giggles and would put other people's computer in that shell when I was in college to be an asshole. It seems that the metro UI is a more disorganized version of program manager that requires a touch device. The networking support was a godsend in Win95 and I wasn't sad to see trumpet winsock disappear.
Minnesota has a similar law but from what I remember if you don't receive you final pay check within 24 hours of ending a job (provided notice was given or being fired) you are entitled to to something like 2x your pay. I had an employer that was a bit dodgy when it came to pay (they did all sorts of questionable shit) and when the closed their Minnesota stores they really screwed up bad. They had a policy that made you full time if you worked more than some number of hours in a pay period for 2 consecutive pay periods (I want to say it was something like 70 hours in two weeks). When they were closing up I made sure that I made it to those hours as full time employees were going to get 3 months worth of pay as severance. They were hard up for people to work so they weren't really checking to ensure people stayed within their allotted hours so I was able to do it discretely. Well they ended up screwing up my final check as the system did catch that I was a full time employee but wasn't flagged as one and the processes of that transition caused a delay and I didn't get my last pay check on time but when I finally got it a few days later it was something like $7500 (I was in high school at the time) which was huge for me.
At mine it was $25 and that was your initial deposit. I also have to maintain a minimum monthly average balance of $25 but that value comes from all accounts you have there and has never been a problem.
I did that, but it was called program manager, not task man. I think the option existed in 98 as well. The OS didn't present you with an option but it was configurable in System.ini file.
You are forgetting users like my step mother who can't figure out why her new laptop acts like someone's phone instead like her computer at work. If she wanted something that acted like a smart phone she would have bought a smart phone.
Subd. 7.Plate fastened and visible.
All plates must be (1) securely fastened so as to prevent them from swinging, (2) displayed horizontally with the identifying numbers and letters facing outward from the vehicle, and (3) mounted in the upright position. The person driving the motor vehicle shall keep the plate legible and unobstructed and free from grease, dust, or other blurring material so that the lettering is plainly visible at all times. It is unlawful to cover any assigned letters and numbers or the name of the state of origin of a license plate with any material whatever, including any clear or colorless material that affects the plate's visibility or reflectivity.
I'm not putting any cover over the plate or slopping it up. I would also not be affecting the reflective properties of the plate. The plate would still be legible, unobstructed, and free from grease, dust, or other blurring material so I wouldn't run afoul of the law. The Minnesota law seems pretty specific about physical things and lighting isn't a blurring material as it isn't changing the reflected ray's path (I would really worry if I was spot heating pockets of air enough to do this). Even if given a ticket the defense is to show the judge the plainly visible plate which it would be. And on that note my mind has wandered off and wondered if cops can be charged with making false reports and perjury in a case like that.
On digital cameras they do have warnings about pointing the thing at the sun as that will damage the sensor. Also the sun has a very broad beam (360 degrees) and broad spectrum where as I was thinking more along the lines of a narrow beam in the 15 to 25 degree range of a narrow spectrum that the cameras are already sensitive to. I think it might be doable when you get up into the 100+W range but I don't know. I have seen lasers damage image sensors as well and those are those little red lasers that run off of 3 button cells but it is with a very narrow beam and a single wavelength.
Stories like this have come out previously but maybe this time it will get traction as it is happening in a big important city in CA. The city of Minneapolis MN has tried to get the data they have been collecting classified as non public data for a while now and this legislative session it was made private. This is the article that broke the story but doesn't mention how long Minneapolis had been doing it but the neighboring city of St. Paul has been doing it since 2008. At the time of the article Minneapolis had eight mobile vehicle cameras and at least two stationary cameras and St. Paul had 10 mobile units but those numbers are from about a year ago. For those of you who wonder why this type of thing is a bad idea there is the MPR article about just how some people used the Minneapolis license plate DB.
I have said before we should be massively over or under exposing these images. Most states have gone to newer style plates that are higher contrast in the IR spectrum and have easier to OCR letters and numbers for this reason. I have been saying we need some high output IR LEDs to illuminate the license plate or the area around it so it either massively over or under exposes the plate to become unreadable by machine. If you are dumping out enough power (No idea what it would take so if others can venture a guess I am all ears) you should be able to either temporarily or permanently damage the image sensor in the camera but I imagine 100W of narrow beam IR from the front and back plate area would make your plate pretty unreadable. You could even build the lights into a license plate holder.
Slashdot Mirror
Nice to know I am not the only person who drives a vehicle until it doesn't move under its own power any more. The tech I would like in a vehicle entertainment system would be:
AM radio
FM radio
Weather band radio
3.5mm aux port
A mode for displaying OBDII data and error codes
This kind of thing is simple, cheap, reliable, useful and not flashy hence why it will never be included. I don't drive my car to be entertained (well I actually do but when doing that I don't have the radio on when going around the track) I drive it to go somewhere and to be able to listen to news, music, or hear a weather forecast on my drive is nice. The ODBII functionality would be nice but unless you work on cars you probably don't care, and if you do then you probably have a scan tool that will get some or all of the provided data.
A standard 3.5mm aux port would have been a pretty standard connection and back then connecting a portable CD player was something that was done frequently and most of the time using the awful cassette adapter. The whole process would have been much easier if auto makers had just used a standard 3.5mm jack instead. As an added bonus you could now connect your modern phone, ipod, etc. through that as well since they all still have a 3.5mm jack for connecting headphones.
Well to be fair when you have a feed lot with 1000 head of cattle on it packed in nose to nose like sardines knee deep in their own filth there is a good reason to pump them full of antibiotics. The antibiotics don't make the animals grow faster but enable the conditions to fatten them up quicker. The steroids they give them also help them grow quicker and larger as well.
The maximum theoretical efficiency of an internal combustion engine is actually much higher.
Since they are a heat engine the carnot cycle is the correct model to use so the formula 1-tC/tH is what we need to determine maximum theoretical efficiency. Lets assume it is a hot day with outside temps around 125F (325 Kelvin) this will be our cold side or tC, this only makes things look worse for me unless you live in the south west US at the moment. A quick search also indicates that at standard pressure in open air (not compressed at a ratio of 8:1 or greater like in most vehicles and also contained) that gasoline burns at around 1950C (2223 Kelvin), which would be an underestimate for the temp inside the engine so it makes things look worse for me, so we now have our hot side or tH. Now plug in the numbers and we get a maximum theoretical efficiency of 1-325/2223=.8538 or over 85% which is substantially higher than the numbers I provided.
Yes I know electric motors get real world efficiencies higher than that with good ones getting above 95% and that even crappy electric motors are above 70% efficient. Also the numbers I provided were real world numbers from around 2000 that were done as part of a study by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries in looking into how to get even greater efficiency out of diesel engines. If you want really efficient ICEs we need higher compression ratios, lower friction internal parts, heads and blocks that transfer heat less quickly out of the cylinder (maybe some sort of ceramic liners or larger per cylinder displacement), lower reciprocating mass, and better more dynamic tuning of engines. Granted higher compression ratios are bad for the environment with the NOx emissions they generate but the modern 3 way cat does a fairly good job of eliminating them.
A better question is what is the idle capacity at night when the demand is low and would that idle capacity be enough to charge all vehicles? From what I have read on the subject is by charging overnight there really wouldn't be much if any need for additional capacity as so much of our generating capacity sits idle overnight (spinning but not producing as it costs a lot of money to cold start a generator). The same is probably true of other developed countries like in western Europe. Also if we needed to add a new plant it would be capable of charging 3x the vehicles as we have enough capacity to run society already so the new plant would charge 3 shifts of vehicles for 8 hours each every day. Also my estimate of the number of vehicles that could be charged overnight is under by a lot as the 225 KWh that I stated each vehicle consumed is about the equivalent of the extractable energy (by a standard internal combustion gasoline engine) of 25 gallons of gasoline which is an absurd amount of fuel to consume in 1.5 hours unless you are driving something like a big rig or OHV earth mover hence why I stated it was a substantial under estimate of the number of vehicles that could be charged overnight.
Serious question how do you measure how dangerous something is?
If going by body count then I believe the Kalashnikov line of firearms is probably the leader (I remember reading that it had killed more people than every other firearm) for weapons. Now when you get to silly arguments like the number of possible people that could be harmed or killed (everyone could be harmed or killed by just about anything) then everything is about equal.
you would end up with a power plant for every 1000 people or something silly
No. If we use use some reasonable numbers we can figure this out:
.75 KW (this is really close and an easy to use value)
Lets use the reasonable value of 1 hp =
Also lets assume the average vehicle's engine produces 200 horse power or 150 KW (a reasonable value)
Let's also assume an average total vehicle running time per day of 1.5 hours
So in a worst case scenario where the vehicles were consuming peak power the entire time they were running (I am going for worst case here to show how absurd your statement) they would consume 225 KWh per vehicle.
Now since we don't need to charge a vehicle overnight in 1 hour and instead could charge it for 8 hours the power supplied to each vehicle would need to be about 29 KW (rounded up).
Now lets look at a reasonable sized power plant with an output of 1GW (reasonable size coal, natural gas, or a small nuke plant).
That 1GW plant could charge about 34,000 vehicles overnight.
That is hardly a silly value and that is using some absurd input values to make it look as bad as possible. Do you really drive a vehicle with it floored and only vary the brakes even when stopped but the vehicle is running? If we went to a more reasonable power usage instead of assuming that a vehicle always outputs it's peak power you could probably expect that value to increase by a factor of 3 to 5 and still be under estimating.
Typically the modern road vehicle gasoline engines sit in the 25%-30% range now, diesels are in the 30%-35% range and massive low RPM marine diesels are above 50%. The only thing that beats the massive marine diesels is the combined cycle gas turbines but that is only when their waste heat is being utilized, if not they are pretty close to the marine diesels in efficiency.
But they get to wave their envirocock here on /. since the electrons coming to their house are certified to come from a pure and green source which has to count for something.
I never have understood this belief that paying extra for power because it supposedly comes from green sources. The grid has no idea where your electrons came from (lets ignore the markets and generation control sides as those only affect the input power not consumed power) and really doesn't care. The power grid sees electron sources and demand for those electrons and just moves them in the most efficient manner from supply to demand and the "green energy" people are paying for probably came from the closest operational power plant taking the most direct route. As you point out there are green/renewable energy mandates and I doubt that the total power consumed by people who pay extra for the "100% renewable" power is even close to the mandated percentage of renewable power being generated so it really is a scam.
None the engine would still produce the same amount of power for a given amount of fuel.
Now ignoring my snarky comment this should be fairly easy to figure out if we can get the right data. We would need to know the rolling resistance of the vehicle at the different weights (with and without batteries/electric motors) since that will be the driver of difference once at speed. Also we would need to know the power to weight ratio of the hybrid with it's hybrid components and without them to figure out if it since that will be a big determination of how it accelerates in each case. I know know the physics that would be needed (it has been too long since I have done these types of problems) but I would imagine that there would be a slight benefit from having the hybrid. Now granted hybrids typically have smaller engines than their non hybrid versions since a big engine is only needed when getting up to speed so expect your non hybrid hybrid to accelerate like a dog (think Yugo).
I keep hearing how we have basically maximized ICE since there has been about 100 years (actually getting close to 140 now) of development on them. Yet when I look at even modern ones there seems to be a lot that could still be done that isn't being done every where. Some things that come to mind:
Go to electronic valves and get rid of the cam(s)
Higher compression ratios (needs direct injection), and not the gaming of it that Toyota does with their Atkinson cycle engines
More use of the Atkinson cycle instead of the Otto cycle
More direct injection (this finally seems to be happening)
Light weight pistons (forged aluminum alloy) and rods (titanium alloy)
Electric water pumps
Electric AC compressors
Electric power steering pumps
Low friction coatings (nitrides and DLC)
Multiple spark plugs (racers have been doing this for years)
Higher boost forced induction
Granted these won't see the massive improvements that other technology has but there still is plenty of room for improvement.
The power for the AC compressor comes from the engine transferred there by the belt. Granted there is the electric AC compressor clutch but that is so little energy as to not be worth mentioning. What I would like to see is is a hydraulic hybrid vehicle. It seems like they would be more robust and lighter system than the standard electric hybrids but they aren't as sexy either.
For better electric motors we need more powerful magnets and better conductors. Both would allow for smaller and lighter motors at the same output power which means hauling around less mass and greater range.
What coal plants are you looking at, they have gotten better over the last 40 years. If what you are saying it correct then we should be replacing all coal plants with more efficient large low speed marine diesels which get just over 50% efficiency. Also the 17% seem specious for vehicle sized internal combustion engines as typically numbers I see quoted are around 25-30%.
When looking at stationary power generation efficiency matters but less than cost per output power. The biggest environmental benefit of late has been low natural gas prices which have brought the cost of power from gas generation down below that of coal. As an added benefit those combine cycle gas turbines have a higher efficiency than the coal ones and they also release less CO2 per until power than coal does.
Here is a paper done in the early 2000s looking at engine efficiencies that should provide some more reasonable values for engine efficiencies but is probably on the low side given that there has been almost 15 years of advancement since it was published.
From what I have seen of large open pit mines (the northern Minnesota iron mines) the barren land is where they are actively doing mining operations not the surronding areas. The piles of overburden aren't an issue as trees seem to love to grow on a giant pile of topsoil. The tailings fields/ponds may be different for nickle than for iron but I wouldn't think it would be radically different as it isn't like gold mining where they use arsenic on talings fields to get as much gold as possible. You can clearly see the large iron mines up in northern Minnesota from space and they are huge holes in the ground but the native vegetation grows all around them without issue.
Well those large mining machines are starting to go electric although they typically have a large stationary generator (several KV supply) and a tether for the slower moving ones. You have the giant shovels which are electric, truly massive bucket wheel excavators which are electric, even the haul trucks now are going to electric drive (CAT is still mechanical drive on some of their trucks but they are more efficient than their competition) although the haul trucks carry their generator with them but there has been work to have them run from overhead lines as well. The engines in the generators (and haul trucks) are the high efficiency diesels that are similar to the ones used in stationary power generation so it probably won't be long until they can be powered from a remote electric supply if they aren't already.
I used program manager for a while on Win95 but then as I learned more of the explorer shell I eventually converted to it. I would switch back to it from time to time for shits and giggles and would put other people's computer in that shell when I was in college to be an asshole. It seems that the metro UI is a more disorganized version of program manager that requires a touch device. The networking support was a godsend in Win95 and I wasn't sad to see trumpet winsock disappear.
Minnesota has a similar law but from what I remember if you don't receive you final pay check within 24 hours of ending a job (provided notice was given or being fired) you are entitled to to something like 2x your pay. I had an employer that was a bit dodgy when it came to pay (they did all sorts of questionable shit) and when the closed their Minnesota stores they really screwed up bad. They had a policy that made you full time if you worked more than some number of hours in a pay period for 2 consecutive pay periods (I want to say it was something like 70 hours in two weeks). When they were closing up I made sure that I made it to those hours as full time employees were going to get 3 months worth of pay as severance. They were hard up for people to work so they weren't really checking to ensure people stayed within their allotted hours so I was able to do it discretely. Well they ended up screwing up my final check as the system did catch that I was a full time employee but wasn't flagged as one and the processes of that transition caused a delay and I didn't get my last pay check on time but when I finally got it a few days later it was something like $7500 (I was in high school at the time) which was huge for me.
At mine it was $25 and that was your initial deposit. I also have to maintain a minimum monthly average balance of $25 but that value comes from all accounts you have there and has never been a problem.
I did that, but it was called program manager, not task man. I think the option existed in 98 as well. The OS didn't present you with an option but it was configurable in System.ini file.
You are forgetting users like my step mother who can't figure out why her new laptop acts like someone's phone instead like her computer at work. If she wanted something that acted like a smart phone she would have bought a smart phone.
Subd. 7.Plate fastened and visible.
All plates must be (1) securely fastened so as to prevent them from swinging, (2) displayed horizontally with the identifying numbers and letters facing outward from the vehicle, and (3) mounted in the upright position. The person driving the motor vehicle shall keep the plate legible and unobstructed and free from grease, dust, or other blurring material so that the lettering is plainly visible at all times. It is unlawful to cover any assigned letters and numbers or the name of the state of origin of a license plate with any material whatever, including any clear or colorless material that affects the plate's visibility or reflectivity.
I'm not putting any cover over the plate or slopping it up. I would also not be affecting the reflective properties of the plate. The plate would still be legible, unobstructed, and free from grease, dust, or other blurring material so I wouldn't run afoul of the law. The Minnesota law seems pretty specific about physical things and lighting isn't a blurring material as it isn't changing the reflected ray's path (I would really worry if I was spot heating pockets of air enough to do this). Even if given a ticket the defense is to show the judge the plainly visible plate which it would be. And on that note my mind has wandered off and wondered if cops can be charged with making false reports and perjury in a case like that.
On digital cameras they do have warnings about pointing the thing at the sun as that will damage the sensor. Also the sun has a very broad beam (360 degrees) and broad spectrum where as I was thinking more along the lines of a narrow beam in the 15 to 25 degree range of a narrow spectrum that the cameras are already sensitive to. I think it might be doable when you get up into the 100+W range but I don't know. I have seen lasers damage image sensors as well and those are those little red lasers that run off of 3 button cells but it is with a very narrow beam and a single wavelength.
Stories like this have come out previously but maybe this time it will get traction as it is happening in a big important city in CA. The city of Minneapolis MN has tried to get the data they have been collecting classified as non public data for a while now and this legislative session it was made private. This is the article that broke the story but doesn't mention how long Minneapolis had been doing it but the neighboring city of St. Paul has been doing it since 2008. At the time of the article Minneapolis had eight mobile vehicle cameras and at least two stationary cameras and St. Paul had 10 mobile units but those numbers are from about a year ago. For those of you who wonder why this type of thing is a bad idea there is the MPR article about just how some people used the Minneapolis license plate DB.
I have said before we should be massively over or under exposing these images. Most states have gone to newer style plates that are higher contrast in the IR spectrum and have easier to OCR letters and numbers for this reason. I have been saying we need some high output IR LEDs to illuminate the license plate or the area around it so it either massively over or under exposes the plate to become unreadable by machine. If you are dumping out enough power (No idea what it would take so if others can venture a guess I am all ears) you should be able to either temporarily or permanently damage the image sensor in the camera but I imagine 100W of narrow beam IR from the front and back plate area would make your plate pretty unreadable. You could even build the lights into a license plate holder.