Back on topic... Real ID is a total failure, like the rest of the Bush administration. One hopes the current one can implement something more realistic and something that would actually accomplish the task of making IDs a little less like Monopoly Money. Current IDs are not up to the task. They are too easy to fake, too easy to get illegitimately and don't work well across state lines. What we need is a well thought out ID that is a little harder to get a hold of, harder to fake, and can help law enforcement/emergency personnel identify someone who's halfway across the country from home.
Actually dude could be an American. I work at a call center and when we knew we weren't being recorded we had a little fun. Sometimes we would fake an Indian name and accent and mess with customer's. Imagine "Hello my name is Mohammed, what can is it I can help you with today" in a really horrid indian accent. What can I say, sometimes we got bored.
So it was YOU working for Symantec. I didn't think they would use three seperate names, but I guess in a shrinking we all have to do a Lily Tomlin sometimes.
No he wasn't cutting and pasting and he was paying very close attention to what he was doing. I've worked support before and I can tell this was a CYA step. If a complaint came back he point at this statement and say the customer was warned.
Except when you get false negatives all the time. I have a Compaq laptop that came installed with XP. Everytime I want to reinstall windows I have to call microsucks to activate it. In those same 20 minutes I can have pretty much any Linux Distro installed. Then I get to wait another two weeks to install updates, restart, install updates, restart, install updates, restart
Would have kept me from destroying a box of pencils a week. I still destroy a massive number of pens by chewing on them. As a result I only get the cheap 10 for $5 pens not the expensive ones (I'm not that stupid).
Your argument is far too general. Drag increases exponentially with speed.
For example at 55 55*55=3025 65*65=4225. So at 65 drag is almost 1 1/2 times that at 55.
Now Here's where it gets complicated. An engine makes different amounts of power at different points in it's RPM band. It looks sort of like the fuel economy chart in the article. It takes varying amounts of fuel to make 1 HP various RPM's. Now each engine has a sweet spot, a narrow band in which it uses the least amount of fuel to make the most power, this is going to be where it makes its peak torque. Now depending on the engine configuration this is either high or low in the RPM band depending on the vehicle. Trucks and V-8s make it in the lower section of the RPM band, cars and smaller engines are higher.
All engines have to expend a static amount of power to keep certain functions going alternator, water pump, power steering, A/C, etc. Now add to that power lose due to drivetrain configuration (varies greatly), and you see that your fuel economy becomes very complicated. As a result the fuel economy curve becomes a lot flatter.
Now for an example. I have driven two cars nearly identical in every respect except drivetrain configuration.
Car 1 280zx 5 speed manual Car 2 280zx turbo 3 speed auto Car 3 1999 Explorer 4 speed auto 4.0L SOHC
Both engines nearly the same except for the turbo and some internal engine differences. Car 1 has a peak efficiency at 4000 RPM, Car 2 makes it much lower 2800 RPM. Car 3 has a much lower peak power and flatter curve to it. As a result I can drive Car 1 and fuel efficiency increases until I reach nearly 80MPH, and a difference of 10MPH doesn't make much of a difference in economy. With car 2 Peak efficiency occurs at about 65MPH and a difference of 10MPH has a much greater impact on economy than with car 1. Now add to the mix car 3 peak efficiency is at 45MPH. Now as a result of the flatter efficiency curve fuel economy doesn't drop much when you reduce speed but increase speed and the fuel economy goes down fairly quickly.
So every vehicle is different, you have to determine your car behaves with you driving and what works best for you. And by the way coasting isn't a good idea, in addition to the extra wear and tear you are actually reducing fuel economy. It takes a lot more power to accelerate from 50 to 60 than it does to just cruise at 60.
Disclaimer: I know there are some things I left out of the above discussion, adding them would make it more complicated than necessary to illustrate my point. I know that it's a gross oversimplification.
It is impossible for a malfunctioning altitude indicator to cause this problem.
According to the ATSB's investigation
the plane dropped at 2000 ft/min leveled then dropped at 1600 ft/min. If if the altitude were too suddenly go to 0 the autopilot has a limit on the maximum rate of descent. And in most cases rate of descent is determined by an accelerometer not altimeter. In any event if the altitude suddenly change it would feel like a normal change in altitude and not a sudden drop. And for some reason the supposed incident happens to be missing from the ATSB's list of investigations.
My guess is that there is a more significant problem with the aircraft's avionics.
Now for the limiting sound volume, I can agree with that. AC/DC doesn't sound right when some moron is talking about his bitches so loud you can here it through his and your closed windows.(I can't figure out how to work the Mexican bump buump bump buump bump in here)
Racing and driver distraction causes the vast majority of accidents and I don't see this system doing anything to prevent it, in fact it makes the problems worse (talking to your car while driving, this isn't KITT here).
Limiting the top speed inherently means you don't trust the ability of the driver to control the car. And in some instances you do need to increase speed for safety reasons.
I leave in New Mexico and 75+ speed limits are common. (In fact seeing 60 or less is just plain weird to me know). Unfortunately New Mexico has more than it's fair share of drunk/stoned drivers. As a result you occasionally have to speed up to make sure the moron behind you doesn't kill you.
In Germany the cars aren't limited. In their driver's ed program you are *REQUIRED* to master driving at 120MPH before you can obtain a license. I have relatives in Germany so I know. And as pretty much everyone knows Germans are some of the safest and courteous drivers in the world.
Being unable to turn off traction control is also stupid. One of the major automotive magazines (can't remember which, if someone else can help me out) tested driver control with traction control on and off. Most expected a professional driver to do better without it, but the fact is that under decent driving conditions even a regular driver does better without traction control! Now under some circumstances snow, ice, and rain some people absolutely need it, so it is best to leave it as an option
For a bit of background I drive a 81 280ZX Turbo. No anti-lock brakes, no TCS, no ACS, no RPM or throttle limiters, no other stupid controls. For 15 years I have driven this car without incident in all sorts of weather. I can out-brake anti-lock systems, I can out control TCS and ASC systems. I have avoided many accidents by avoiding collisions by understanding my car selectively using all if its basic systems to get me out of trouble.
And before someone clueless says its an import with no power, speed, ricer, etc. keep in mind that from 1981 was faster than a Corvette, was the fastest car imported from Japan, and was about the fastest non-exotic you could buy.
If you don't know what some of the abbreviations mean, your opinion has no merit.
We all know where the number came from the 750,000 terrorists that are taking jobs away for those honest, god-fearing, and hard working individuals in Hollywood that are losing there jobs as a result of piracy.
Maybe if would stop making movies and music for pure money (who green-lite Doom, the Arachnotron?) we would actually buy some their stuff. The only stuff I buy is stuff that has long term entertainment value, go Iron-Man but no Indiana Jones (seems to have an odd number curse)
"I'm not dumb. I just have a command of throughly useless information."
You should have thought the process through before having kids. To many people have kids without thinking about the effort that has to be put forth. And if you're thinking of saying "well it wasn't planned" well you should have used contraceptives. You know the neat little things they invented a long time ago.
Take care of your kids. My mom was a single parent and worked two jobs. But she still managed to spend time with us. Here solution to the TV problem was simple. No TV in our rooms and she disconnected the cable when she left, so we weren't able to watch TV. I also had a Nintendo at the time, and guess what. It was locked in her room until she came home and could keep an eye on me when I played.
If you don't want to put forth the effort to properly take care of them you should have adopted them out
Your poor parenting is costing me money. Every VCR, CD/DVD player, TV, computer, cable/sat box, Tivo, CD/DVD, movie, TV show, etc, I've bought, rented, or payed to watch costs me extra because parents like you wouldn't take the time to see if content was objectionable. As a result it a had a mandated parental control system built into it that few knew about and even fewer used.
Take care of your own kids. I'm not your baby sitter
By the way if you have so little time why are you posting instead of doing something useful?
Actually stuff stored in RAM isn't safe either.
If you remember a couple of months back an article was posted were researchers were able to recover contents from RAM more than 10 minutes after power was shut off.
The only way it's safe is if you write something to all locations in RAM.
Additionally you wouldn't gain significant speed. On a server most of your stuff is already in RAM when the system is running. On a desktop you would be better off prefetching, 1 GiB RAM costs around 300 times what 1 GiB HD space costs (1 gig RAM $30, 1 gig HD space $0.05 more or less).
Slashdot Mirror
Anonymous Coward
Is quite right in this case.
Back on topic...
Real ID is a total failure, like the rest of the Bush administration. One hopes the current one can implement something more realistic and something that would actually accomplish the task of making IDs a little less like Monopoly Money. Current IDs are not up to the task. They are too easy to fake, too easy to get illegitimately and don't work well across state lines. What we need is a well thought out ID that is a little harder to get a hold of, harder to fake, and can help law enforcement/emergency personnel identify someone who's halfway across the country from home.
Actually dude could be an American. I work at a call center and when we knew we weren't being recorded we had a little fun. Sometimes we would fake an Indian name and accent and mess with customer's. Imagine "Hello my name is Mohammed, what can is it I can help you with today" in a really horrid indian accent. What can I say, sometimes we got bored.
So it was YOU working for Symantec. I didn't think they would use three seperate names, but I guess in a shrinking we all have to do a Lily Tomlin sometimes.
No he wasn't cutting and pasting and he was paying very close attention to what he was doing. I've worked support before and I can tell this was a CYA step. If a complaint came back he point at this statement and say the customer was warned.
Except when you get false negatives all the time. I have a Compaq laptop that came installed with XP. Everytime I want to reinstall windows I have to call microsucks to activate it. In those same 20 minutes I can have pretty much any Linux Distro installed. Then I get to wait another two weeks to install updates, restart, install updates, restart, install updates, restart
Bad analogy. This is like Ford or GM telling you you have to use a specific brand of fuel or road to drive your car. Which is illegal.
Go find one for me. Of all the OSes you listed only Apple is easy to find, and that's on overpriced hardware.
This is what happens when you become a Microsucks Certified Unprofessional.
I always use plastic pens. Plastic won't harm your teeth, but your teeth can sure destroy plastic.
It needs salt
No it doesn't
Yes it does
No it doesn't
Well I'm putting more salt if you don't like it you can have the leftover poodle.
Would have kept me from destroying a box of pencils a week.
I still destroy a massive number of pens by chewing on them. As a result I only get the cheap 10 for $5 pens not the expensive ones (I'm not that stupid).
I wonder how many people missed the portion immediately below the article
Related Stories
News: Microsoft Denies Paying Nigerians $400K To Ditch Linux 148 comments
Firehose:Woman Admits Sending $400K to Nigerian Scammer by svnt (697929)
This is the training model. Once our fine solders have mastered the intricacies of the trainer they will move up to the model without training wheels.
Your argument is far too general. Drag increases exponentially with speed.
For example at 55 55*55=3025 65*65=4225. So at 65 drag is almost 1 1/2 times that at 55.
Now Here's where it gets complicated. An engine makes different amounts of power at different points in it's RPM band. It looks sort of like the fuel economy chart in the article. It takes varying amounts of fuel to make 1 HP various RPM's. Now each engine has a sweet spot, a narrow band in which it uses the least amount of fuel to make the most power, this is going to be where it makes its peak torque. Now depending on the engine configuration this is either high or low in the RPM band depending on the vehicle. Trucks and V-8s make it in the lower section of the RPM band, cars and smaller engines are higher.
All engines have to expend a static amount of power to keep certain functions going alternator, water pump, power steering, A/C, etc. Now add to that power lose due to drivetrain configuration (varies greatly), and you see that your fuel economy becomes very complicated. As a result the fuel economy curve becomes a lot flatter.
Now for an example. I have driven two cars nearly identical in every respect except drivetrain configuration.
Car 1 280zx 5 speed manual
Car 2 280zx turbo 3 speed auto
Car 3 1999 Explorer 4 speed auto 4.0L SOHC
Both engines nearly the same except for the turbo and some internal engine differences. Car 1 has a peak efficiency at 4000 RPM, Car 2 makes it much lower 2800 RPM. Car 3 has a much lower peak power and flatter curve to it. As a result I can drive Car 1 and fuel efficiency increases until I reach nearly 80MPH, and a difference of 10MPH doesn't make much of a difference in economy. With car 2 Peak efficiency occurs at about 65MPH and a difference of 10MPH has a much greater impact on economy than with car 1. Now add to the mix car 3 peak efficiency is at 45MPH. Now as a result of the flatter efficiency curve fuel economy doesn't drop much when you reduce speed but increase speed and the fuel economy goes down fairly quickly.
So every vehicle is different, you have to determine your car behaves with you driving and what works best for you. And by the way coasting isn't a good idea, in addition to the extra wear and tear you are actually reducing fuel economy. It takes a lot more power to accelerate from 50 to 60 than it does to just cruise at 60.
Disclaimer: I know there are some things I left out of the above discussion, adding them would make it more complicated than necessary to illustrate my point. I know that it's a gross oversimplification.
I call bullshit
It is impossible for a malfunctioning altitude indicator to cause this problem.
According to the ATSB's investigation the plane dropped at 2000 ft/min leveled then dropped at 1600 ft/min. If if the altitude were too suddenly go to 0 the autopilot has a limit on the maximum rate of descent. And in most cases rate of descent is determined by an accelerometer not altimeter. In any event if the altitude suddenly change it would feel like a normal change in altitude and not a sudden drop. And for some reason the supposed incident happens to be missing from the ATSB's list of investigations.
My guess is that there is a more significant problem with the aircraft's avionics.
Reminds of a Simpsons episode when they're flying to Japan.
.
(Bart's playing on the Simpsons equivalent of a Game Boy)
Stewardess: You'll have to turn that off.
Bart grumbles: You're a waitress.
(Turns it off. plane promptly nose dives)
Stewerdess: TURN IT ON! TURN IT ON!
(Turns it back on, plane flies normal)
This makes the problem even worse.
Now for the limiting sound volume, I can agree with that. AC/DC doesn't sound right when some moron is talking about his bitches so loud you can here it through his and your closed windows.(I can't figure out how to work the Mexican bump buump bump buump bump in here)
Racing and driver distraction causes the vast majority of accidents and I don't see this system doing anything to prevent it, in fact it makes the problems worse (talking to your car while driving, this isn't KITT here).
Limiting the top speed inherently means you don't trust the ability of the driver to control the car. And in some instances you do need to increase speed for safety reasons.
I leave in New Mexico and 75+ speed limits are common. (In fact seeing 60 or less is just plain weird to me know). Unfortunately New Mexico has more than it's fair share of drunk/stoned drivers. As a result you occasionally have to speed up to make sure the moron behind you doesn't kill you.
In Germany the cars aren't limited. In their driver's ed program you are *REQUIRED* to master driving at 120MPH before you can obtain a license. I have relatives in Germany so I know. And as pretty much everyone knows Germans are some of the safest and courteous drivers in the world.
Being unable to turn off traction control is also stupid. One of the major automotive magazines (can't remember which, if someone else can help me out) tested driver control with traction control on and off. Most expected a professional driver to do better without it, but the fact is that under decent driving conditions even a regular driver does better without traction control! Now under some circumstances snow, ice, and rain some people absolutely need it, so it is best to leave it as an option
For a bit of background I drive a 81 280ZX Turbo. No anti-lock brakes, no TCS, no ACS, no RPM or throttle limiters, no other stupid controls. For 15 years I have driven this car without incident in all sorts of weather. I can out-brake anti-lock systems, I can out control TCS and ASC systems. I have avoided many accidents by avoiding collisions by understanding my car selectively using all if its basic systems to get me out of trouble.
And before someone clueless says its an import with no power, speed, ricer, etc. keep in mind that from 1981 was faster than a Corvette, was the fastest car imported from Japan, and was about the fastest non-exotic you could buy.
If you don't know what some of the abbreviations mean, your opinion has no merit.
We all know where the number came from the 750,000 terrorists that are taking jobs away for those honest, god-fearing, and hard working individuals in Hollywood that are losing there jobs as a result of piracy.
Maybe if would stop making movies and music for pure money (who green-lite Doom, the Arachnotron?) we would actually buy some their stuff. The only stuff I buy is stuff that has long term entertainment value, go Iron-Man but no Indiana Jones (seems to have an odd number curse)
"I'm not dumb. I just have a command of throughly useless information."
- Calvin, of Calvin and Hobbes
That's your own fault
You should have thought the process through before having kids. To many people have kids without thinking about the effort that has to be put forth. And if you're thinking of saying "well it wasn't planned" well you should have used contraceptives. You know the neat little things they invented a long time ago.
Take care of your kids. My mom was a single parent and worked two jobs. But she still managed to spend time with us. Here solution to the TV problem was simple. No TV in our rooms and she disconnected the cable when she left, so we weren't able to watch TV. I also had a Nintendo at the time, and guess what. It was locked in her room until she came home and could keep an eye on me when I played.
If you don't want to put forth the effort to properly take care of them you should have adopted them out
Your poor parenting is costing me money. Every VCR, CD/DVD player, TV, computer, cable/sat box, Tivo, CD/DVD, movie, TV show, etc, I've bought, rented, or payed to watch costs me extra because parents like you wouldn't take the time to see if content was objectionable. As a result it a had a mandated parental control system built into it that few knew about and even fewer used.
Take care of your own kids. I'm not your baby sitter
By the way if you have so little time why are you posting instead of doing something useful?
Actually stuff stored in RAM isn't safe either. If you remember a couple of months back an article was posted were researchers were able to recover contents from RAM more than 10 minutes after power was shut off. The only way it's safe is if you write something to all locations in RAM. Additionally you wouldn't gain significant speed. On a server most of your stuff is already in RAM when the system is running. On a desktop you would be better off prefetching, 1 GiB RAM costs around 300 times what 1 GiB HD space costs (1 gig RAM $30, 1 gig HD space $0.05 more or less).