Notice how most cars have a button to turn on and off "loudness?" That's essentially the way car stereos do it. But, if it's already compressed, you can make it more compressed, AND MORE LOUDERER!!!
If you're going to complain about a misleading headline, don't be so selective in your examples. He did after all say:
The pro audio guy will prioritize room acoustics and do the necessary treatments to make the room sound right. The hi-fi world attaches less importance to room acoustics, and prioritizes equipment; they are looking more at brand names and reputation.
He says quite a bit more than that, and while not quite ripping it is still unfavorable to the hi fi fanatics.
Heh - precisely why I hate Swiffers and the new crop of "when you're done, you just throw it away" doohickeys. As for something better coming out in the next 4 years... A lot of that is marketing hype to convince people that they need the latest and greatest. I think cell phones are the epitome of this. Absolutely the phones made today are worlds better than my ancient piece of crap - but how many people you know tossed out their iPhone 3 when the 3gs came out? Repeated the same thing for the iPhone 4 and again 4s... Computer hardware, cars, televisions, you name it. People get an impression that they *need* the latest even when what they currently have is fulfilling their needs. It used to be that people couldn't afford to always have the latest and greatest, so we'd get by for a while on our old stuff until our old stuff couldn't cut it anymore.
Now the prices have dropped enough that we can, but that doesn't reflect the true cost. If what you buy so much of can't be built by somebody who can earn a living amenable to you, all you do is pass the costs along. Typically the cost is paid by the manufacturing companies that have closed up shop and the people who used to work there. It's simply not a sustainable economy. At some point there won't be enough people around that can even afford the cheap crap because we put them all out of work buying cheap crap from overseas.
Remember, something better will always be out in four years - but you know what? Something better than *that* will be out in 8. I'd rather drop 20% more on something that'll last me the eight years than 100% more to buy something every four.
All that said, I'm still not convinced the oiled cotton (I think... is it still cotton?) element in the K&N is any more effective than a good paper element air filter;)
While I agree with the pros and cons of coal and nuclear, I do think there are plenty more sources that can and should be used to augment the "backbone" generators where it is appropriate. Hydro, geothermal, solar, wind - they all have regions where they work extremely well and are cost-competitive with the more typical power plants. No, they can't meant all demand, but energy should be about finding the best resources for your region rather than a universal solution. Diversity gives you a far more resilient power grid.
Groundwater seepage and the active geology of the region... There are better places to store it than Yucca Mountain. Of course most of the attention was put on the transport of nuclear waste through the state, rather than issues with the long term storage.
All that said, as a native Nevadan I am not opposed to the Yucca Mountain project. It's gotta go somewhere and while there are better places, there are a whole lot worse. At some point you just need to make your decision and act on it. I am however opposed to the regulatory environment that has kept newer, more efficient nuclear designs from seeing the light of day in the US. Land of the Risk Averse!
Everybody is quick to blame business - but look at the environment that led to it: Americans love their cheap widgets. You have an American made widget on the shelf next to a Chinese made widget, your American widget is usually 20-30% more expensive. What do you suppose people are going to buy? We've created an economy around disposable goods where competition is primarily on price. If a business tries to stay American made, they will fail to their competitors that import. *ALL* Americans have been happily exporting our economy to China. Now it's starting to bite us back and of course we are playing the blame game.
And keep in mind we're comparing the pinnacle of the technology (in the battleship gun) against a technology demonstrator. The velocity, mass, or both are going to increase significantly by the time these get fielded.
Very good response. I'm having trouble digging up details on the dimensions of the demonstrator, but suspect you won't need anything near the size of a battleship to equip one of these. Picture a submarine equipped with such a weapon - surface, fire, submerge. All from hundreds of miles away. The problem isn't figuring out how a carrier task force can combat such a weapon - it simply can't. The problem is how do you replace the carrier? There are a number of roles that aircraft do that simply can't be met by long range artillery, no matter how fast and accurate. How do you gain air superiority when you don't have a platform for your aircraft? How do you put boots on the ground and supply them?
Most of this discussion has been about the applications of this gun in the offensive role, but I think in the defensive role it is a fundamental change in the way large wars are fought.
That only applies to the sexually repressed... Ultimately it depends on the attitudes of the person towards sex. If it's dirty and naughty, then you're right. If it's just something two people enjoy, then you're wrong.
Having sex early *could* be a sign of low self esteem, or it could be a sign of a girl who knows what she wants and isn't afraid to get it. It really all depends on the girl - and of course if she's an American girl, you're probably right...
I respectfully disagree with many of your points here...
"More experienced" simply means more relationships, failed and otherwise. How many people do you know have only had failed relationships? A relationship can be extremely successful and still end. Just about anybody who's dated will have some people they were with that they learned from, enjoyed, and came out of the relationship a better person (in a positive way - not in a "won't make that mistake again" way).
Confidence may be gained over time, but it is not solely derived from power, success, and age. Find somebody whose confidence was, take away their success and power, and see how quickly their bubble bursts. It's not necessarily "pretending" because the confidence is there, it's just based on money. Confidence from knowing your capabilities, and most importantly, knowing and *accepting* your failings is a different story.
Lastly, dating sites are a perfectly good avenue to meet people. There are simply too many people starting successful relationships through them to discount them. Sure, normal people don't "need" dating sites, just like they don't "need" bars or friends of friends or any of that. If somebody thinks they're hot shit but will only meet people online, well you probably have a point. On the flipside, they also allow some otherwise extremely introverted people to actually date.
I dunno, seems to me it'd be quicker just to order your parts from Digikey instead of going to Radio Shack, buying a cell phone and contract, then dismantling the phone to desolder the part you need (and hope you didn't bust the part in the process)... Sure, Radio Shack is convenient for a lot of things, as long as all of those things are cell phones and expensive Ethernet cables.
In an embedded system - particularly a critical system - you usually have software aware of the state of interfacing hardware. Additionally, you should have some redundant systems so you can handle a hardware fault on one of them. The article says "two chips failed," with no further details. I'd assume the guys calling it a software error are doing so for a reason - likely those chips were part of some databus interface, D/A or A/D converter, or something that the software *talks* to (as opposed to runs on). These are all things that the software can detect and report faults on - and if it's a redundant system, fail over to a different channel. I'm making a big assumption that if it is a programming error, it's a hardware fault that should have been detected and handled instead causing the software to crash. Possibly both channels of a redundant system (from the article quote "a programming error which led to a simultaneous reboot of two working channels of an onboard computer").
Admittedly all of us here (especially me) are talking out of our asses and none of the listed links seem to have any details (not that we'd read them anyway...). But you know that, and I know that - so we can hopefully speculate without trolling ourselves! We don't know the system, we don't know what failed, but we can certainly use it as a talking point to discuss when software can be responsible for not handling a hardware fault.
Why would an elephant eat the tough grass first , why not the sweet tender native stuff and leave the tough grass alone until all the tender sweet stuff is gone?
Because then they couldn't get their government grant and ship in the Elephants!
Get more water from where? Pipe it in? Desalinate the few salt lakes that exist out in the desert? In the desert, water isn't just some resource you can dig up. It is limited, it is valuable, and people use a *lot* of it. Sure, there are ways to get more water - but they are expensive and usually quite devastating to the natural habitat (unless you want to get *really* expensive). Fact is, people are not going to live in an expensive (and unpleasant) place out in the middle of nowhere if there isn't a reason to. Towns need a reason to exist, and taming an invasive grass really doesn't cut it.
Not only that, but a smoldering weeks-old lightning strike or heat from friction by the wind! A fascinating 3500 year old tree is destroyed in a fascinating way. My nerd juices are certainly flowing...
Those trees are clones of the same ancient root system. For a fascinating read, look up the wiki article on the Pando clonal colony of quaking aspens - they've estimated the root system to be 80,000 years old and covers 106 acres!
'Course, better to not rile up the nutcases on the age of these things. If somebody really wants to believe in something, you won't change their mind with mere factual observations...
Slashdot Mirror
Notice how most cars have a button to turn on and off "loudness?" That's essentially the way car stereos do it. But, if it's already compressed, you can make it more compressed, AND MORE LOUDERER!!!
The pro audio guy will prioritize room acoustics and do the necessary treatments to make the room sound right. The hi-fi world attaches less importance to room acoustics, and prioritizes equipment; they are looking more at brand names and reputation.
He says quite a bit more than that, and while not quite ripping it is still unfavorable to the hi fi fanatics.
...except its cost of manufacture.
Heh - precisely why I hate Swiffers and the new crop of "when you're done, you just throw it away" doohickeys. As for something better coming out in the next 4 years... A lot of that is marketing hype to convince people that they need the latest and greatest. I think cell phones are the epitome of this. Absolutely the phones made today are worlds better than my ancient piece of crap - but how many people you know tossed out their iPhone 3 when the 3gs came out? Repeated the same thing for the iPhone 4 and again 4s... Computer hardware, cars, televisions, you name it. People get an impression that they *need* the latest even when what they currently have is fulfilling their needs. It used to be that people couldn't afford to always have the latest and greatest, so we'd get by for a while on our old stuff until our old stuff couldn't cut it anymore.
;)
Now the prices have dropped enough that we can, but that doesn't reflect the true cost. If what you buy so much of can't be built by somebody who can earn a living amenable to you, all you do is pass the costs along. Typically the cost is paid by the manufacturing companies that have closed up shop and the people who used to work there. It's simply not a sustainable economy. At some point there won't be enough people around that can even afford the cheap crap because we put them all out of work buying cheap crap from overseas.
Remember, something better will always be out in four years - but you know what? Something better than *that* will be out in 8. I'd rather drop 20% more on something that'll last me the eight years than 100% more to buy something every four.
All that said, I'm still not convinced the oiled cotton (I think... is it still cotton?) element in the K&N is any more effective than a good paper element air filter
While I agree with the pros and cons of coal and nuclear, I do think there are plenty more sources that can and should be used to augment the "backbone" generators where it is appropriate. Hydro, geothermal, solar, wind - they all have regions where they work extremely well and are cost-competitive with the more typical power plants. No, they can't meant all demand, but energy should be about finding the best resources for your region rather than a universal solution. Diversity gives you a far more resilient power grid.
Groundwater seepage and the active geology of the region... There are better places to store it than Yucca Mountain. Of course most of the attention was put on the transport of nuclear waste through the state, rather than issues with the long term storage.
All that said, as a native Nevadan I am not opposed to the Yucca Mountain project. It's gotta go somewhere and while there are better places, there are a whole lot worse. At some point you just need to make your decision and act on it. I am however opposed to the regulatory environment that has kept newer, more efficient nuclear designs from seeing the light of day in the US. Land of the Risk Averse!
Everybody is quick to blame business - but look at the environment that led to it: Americans love their cheap widgets. You have an American made widget on the shelf next to a Chinese made widget, your American widget is usually 20-30% more expensive. What do you suppose people are going to buy? We've created an economy around disposable goods where competition is primarily on price. If a business tries to stay American made, they will fail to their competitors that import. *ALL* Americans have been happily exporting our economy to China. Now it's starting to bite us back and of course we are playing the blame game.
Picture Patrick Stewart with hair. Go on, do it. Do you really want to live in that world?
And keep in mind we're comparing the pinnacle of the technology (in the battleship gun) against a technology demonstrator. The velocity, mass, or both are going to increase significantly by the time these get fielded.
Very good response. I'm having trouble digging up details on the dimensions of the demonstrator, but suspect you won't need anything near the size of a battleship to equip one of these. Picture a submarine equipped with such a weapon - surface, fire, submerge. All from hundreds of miles away. The problem isn't figuring out how a carrier task force can combat such a weapon - it simply can't. The problem is how do you replace the carrier? There are a number of roles that aircraft do that simply can't be met by long range artillery, no matter how fast and accurate. How do you gain air superiority when you don't have a platform for your aircraft? How do you put boots on the ground and supply them?
Most of this discussion has been about the applications of this gun in the offensive role, but I think in the defensive role it is a fundamental change in the way large wars are fought.
Yes, but only if they're charged or spinning - as opposed to chemical explosives which can get angry at any time.
That only applies to the sexually repressed... Ultimately it depends on the attitudes of the person towards sex. If it's dirty and naughty, then you're right. If it's just something two people enjoy, then you're wrong.
Having sex early *could* be a sign of low self esteem, or it could be a sign of a girl who knows what she wants and isn't afraid to get it. It really all depends on the girl - and of course if she's an American girl, you're probably right...
You are my hero.
I respectfully disagree with many of your points here...
"More experienced" simply means more relationships, failed and otherwise. How many people do you know have only had failed relationships? A relationship can be extremely successful and still end. Just about anybody who's dated will have some people they were with that they learned from, enjoyed, and came out of the relationship a better person (in a positive way - not in a "won't make that mistake again" way).
Confidence may be gained over time, but it is not solely derived from power, success, and age. Find somebody whose confidence was, take away their success and power, and see how quickly their bubble bursts. It's not necessarily "pretending" because the confidence is there, it's just based on money. Confidence from knowing your capabilities, and most importantly, knowing and *accepting* your failings is a different story.
Lastly, dating sites are a perfectly good avenue to meet people. There are simply too many people starting successful relationships through them to discount them. Sure, normal people don't "need" dating sites, just like they don't "need" bars or friends of friends or any of that. If somebody thinks they're hot shit but will only meet people online, well you probably have a point. On the flipside, they also allow some otherwise extremely introverted people to actually date.
Don't hold back man, tell us how you really feel.
I dunno, seems to me it'd be quicker just to order your parts from Digikey instead of going to Radio Shack, buying a cell phone and contract, then dismantling the phone to desolder the part you need (and hope you didn't bust the part in the process)... Sure, Radio Shack is convenient for a lot of things, as long as all of those things are cell phones and expensive Ethernet cables.
In an embedded system - particularly a critical system - you usually have software aware of the state of interfacing hardware. Additionally, you should have some redundant systems so you can handle a hardware fault on one of them. The article says "two chips failed," with no further details. I'd assume the guys calling it a software error are doing so for a reason - likely those chips were part of some databus interface, D/A or A/D converter, or something that the software *talks* to (as opposed to runs on). These are all things that the software can detect and report faults on - and if it's a redundant system, fail over to a different channel. I'm making a big assumption that if it is a programming error, it's a hardware fault that should have been detected and handled instead causing the software to crash. Possibly both channels of a redundant system (from the article quote "a programming error which led to a simultaneous reboot of two working channels of an onboard computer").
Admittedly all of us here (especially me) are talking out of our asses and none of the listed links seem to have any details (not that we'd read them anyway...). But you know that, and I know that - so we can hopefully speculate without trolling ourselves! We don't know the system, we don't know what failed, but we can certainly use it as a talking point to discuss when software can be responsible for not handling a hardware fault.
But remember - it's not the gravity but the surface pressure that'll kill ya!
The Pando colony is in central Utah, so while it's seen significant changes, I don't believe it was ever buried under an ice sheet.
Why would an elephant eat the tough grass first , why not the sweet tender native stuff and leave the tough grass alone until all the tender sweet stuff is gone?
Because then they couldn't get their government grant and ship in the Elephants!
Get more water from where? Pipe it in? Desalinate the few salt lakes that exist out in the desert? In the desert, water isn't just some resource you can dig up. It is limited, it is valuable, and people use a *lot* of it. Sure, there are ways to get more water - but they are expensive and usually quite devastating to the natural habitat (unless you want to get *really* expensive). Fact is, people are not going to live in an expensive (and unpleasant) place out in the middle of nowhere if there isn't a reason to. Towns need a reason to exist, and taming an invasive grass really doesn't cut it.
Not only that, but a smoldering weeks-old lightning strike or heat from friction by the wind! A fascinating 3500 year old tree is destroyed in a fascinating way. My nerd juices are certainly flowing...
Those trees are clones of the same ancient root system. For a fascinating read, look up the wiki article on the Pando clonal colony of quaking aspens - they've estimated the root system to be 80,000 years old and covers 106 acres!
'Course, better to not rile up the nutcases on the age of these things. If somebody really wants to believe in something, you won't change their mind with mere factual observations...
4600 something, a Bristlecone Pine in the White Mountains in California.
Obviously we need a post about the state of the youngest trees in the world so we can get their view on this important issue.