Are you comparing specific vehicles? What SUV weighs 2500kg!? Even a loaded landcruiser is only 1,500kg. But just to humour you, a Jetta has a reported output (per-scandal number) of 144kg, whereas a CX-5 has a CO2 output of 119kg.
I'll give you that greater weight makes efficiency more difficult but I'll point out that just chip tuning for power will blast the CO2 footprint up dramatically. VW is basically selling cars that are chip tuned for performance out of the gate and making it look like they are not.
> Similarly trying to do some historic conquest like giving back Arab land to Iran I completely disagree with this. Arab leadership in Iran has destroyed what is a beautiful country and the uprising that brought them into power resulted in the massacre and continued victimization and oppression of a diverse range of peoples.
As for the Native Americans... I'm not so sure a lot of tribes have it all that much better than Palestinians in the Transjordan region...
I'd like to note it's even worse than that: while many "Palestinians" were content to be Jordanians it was Jordan who rejected them.
It's an unfortunate reality that the Palestinians are pawns, and much of the Arab world wants them that way. It's a case of "Heads we win, tails you loose", where if a Palestinian kills an Israeli their foreign backers share a victory in the battlefield, and if a Palestinian is killed they get to present it to the world media as Israel being the evil aggressor.
While that's entirely conjecture; it should be noted that shortly after the territories were allotted to them the infrastructure quickly fell into disrepair and some of it was actually actively demolished in a backward attempt to revolt against Israel. So, even with progress handed to them, the Palestinians did not choose it.
> because those aren't examples of "giving them enough of someone else's land" Uh, yes they are. Arabs become dominant in those regions when they took over - how is this different other than that the re-establishment of Israel was internationally sanctioned and not a bloody conquest? If you're going to ask Israel to "give back" land to the Arabs then you're going to have to at least ask Arabs to give back land to Persians, Zorastarians / Aryans, Assyrians, etc.
??? I think you don't know the history here. This is land that was basically considered impossible to develop and Israel created methods to develop it and did so. After this is when all the sudden the "Palestinians" wanted it. Before and during the development it was a somewhat different story altogether.
> If it's not your land, it's not your land. You're talking about land that was allotted to and developed by Israel that only later was partitioned off and artificial borders and autonomous governments put in place. Saying "If it's not your land, it's not your land." is an argument against a two-state solution.
THIS! And the sad thing is when they decided to delay their market release SkyActiv was already more efficient than TDI. Think of all the Mazdas that would have been on the road and still desirable in the market now had they released.
In a strange twist of fate Mazda proceeded to pour tons of research funds and came out with something like a 20% peak efficiency increase after about a year.
Really though, think of all the billions VW made off of this that would have been Mazdas. THIS is why I think VW deserves maximum punishment.
Everybody who knows anything about cars has know this for years. The test environment is very specific and will always give close to "ideal" numbers for that car. EG test environments have very specific timing, very specific turns, very specific speeds etc. and data is acquired at very specific points. But the real world can never be so ideal - there's a lot more stopping, there's a lot more acceleration and deceleration, there's a lot more idling, and there's also bad drivers.
The Prius for example is a fantastic example of this, as a good Eco-conscious driver could get better gas milage in poor conditions than a driver unaware of what good Eco-driving is in ideal conditions. I recall a video where they just taught a driver about better breaking and acceleration and immediately saw nearly 30% improvement in fuel consumption. It turns out if you drive a Prius without being mindful you get close to no benefit and real world driving presents a lot of situations where you simply can't be mindful ~ EG: block-to-block stop-start city driving.
So, go f* yourself guardian, you're alarmist idiots trying to make an issue out of something we've already known.
In a way, yes. Maybe you've seen an "eco mode" on some regular, non-eco cars. All this really does is reduce the amount the ECU opens the throttle valve relative to the amount the throttle is depressed. You can achieve the same effect simply by not pressing so hard on the accelerator [and shifting at or under 3k~ish] - which is why you hear about mindful drivers getting better gas mileage.
Of course it's much more fun to smash your throttle to the floor and shift at 8k+.
Ignition switch fraud didn't hurt the sales of other companies in the market. This is first-class fraud and it has a massive effect on the consumer, the market, and the environment. Furthermore they didn't do it once and improve their technology so they didn't have to do it anymore - they just kept the fraud going for a few consecutive models.
Tests *are* usually done through a specific test or diagnostic mode. In fact much of the test can be automated now just buy strapping the car up to a testing rig and plugging in a diagnostic computer to the OBD-II port. VW just made it so that test mode would give out fraudulent results.
And in case you were wondering test modes usually disable a lot of self-regulatory systems; meaning things like fuel efficiency and emissions will be at their worst in these modes. In a lot of vehicles this mode also happens to be the highest performance mode, which is why you'll sometimes see gear heads do a little dance with different controls to enable it when they start their cars.
Actually the points of contention here are: 1. Emergency pumps were marked as checked, but were not actually checked. 2. Diesel backup generators were probably not checked as they experienced a cascade failure when powered on. 3. Post could have been dealt with better (though this is likely more the fault of former P.M. Kann). 4. Company may have mis-used disaster management emergency funds / officials did not act in a responsible manner (EG officials did not take pay cuts / officials did not start working extra hours / generally officials did not show enough responsibility).
Particularly #4 should be looked at as there have been accidents at nuclear plants before - all previous cases had officials immediately responding to the issues ON SITE and seeing the solutions to completion personally. Companies like Touhoku Electric and Chubu Electric have shown extremely responsible oversight to the point of their CEO's taking extreme personal risks to remedy any problems and constantly going beyond government requirements for all safety measures. TEPCO on the other hand seems to be run by greedy d-bags.
You're an idiot. No such laws exist and there have been constant news stories about Fukushima and agriculture there.
There are radioactive hot-spots in many places all around the world. Just for reference none of the radioactive hot spots in Tokyo come close to the radioactivity of the famous black sand beaches in Brazil.
The vegetables from Fukushima are safer to eat then the FUD you've been stuffing down.
The rice and vegetables being discussed here are not being raised in the exclusion zone. Fukushima is a 13,780 km prefecture with a very large amount of agriculture. Less than a percent of the total land zoned for agriculture before the quake/disaster in contained in the exclusion zone.
Actually food is made available in Olympic villages and outside food is often restricted due to concerns over doping. There's tons of stories relating to this from the Beijing Olympics. Usain Bolt even recalled eating nothing but chicken nuggets and cola for two days before his record run because it was the only food available he felt was safe.
1. The exclusion zone has been shrinking due to cleanup efforts. 2. The rice and vegetables being discussed here are not being raised in the exclusion zone. Fukushima is a 13,780 km prefecture with a very large amount of agriculture with. Less than a percent of the total land zoned for agriculture before the quake/disaster in contained in the exclusion zone.
If you're actually wondering; yes, on several occasions the Emperor (and the Empress) have eaten both vegetables and rice from Fukushima while visiting farming communities there. Furthermore, government officials including the PM have done the same.
I'd argue that the reason for low OSS OS adoption on the desktop has much more to do with the target market. Haiku can basically exist as a little niche OS with very few users who only care about their specific hardware configurations because at the end of the day it's an OS for people who were fans of BeOS. It doesn't have some killer feature or some market it's aiming to grab.
Linux on the other hand can be made into what you want. While there are some vendors who build out to catch the desktop market there are a limited number. Furthermore, there is the question of weather or not most devs would want a larger desktop market in the first place. Why have more bug reports, more uninformed support requests, more complaining users when you don't actually monetarily benefit. If we're going to start encouraging a market where Linux will rule the desktop we need to find some way to properly pay the developers of the software that allows it to be a desktop OS.
What I don't like about JNI is how it approaches wrapper generation - essentially assuming you are writing your C/C++ code *specifically* to be used in Java. Case in point being the fact you basically have to directly modify your header files. This can of course be avoided by writing code/headers that include JNI and your native headers - but then on top of that you need to write wrapper headers and wrapper code. Most other wrapper systems don't make this assumption and just let you write an interface or some wrapper code and be done with it.
On top of that actual generation of the wrapped binaries isn't nearly as smooth and integrated as say Ruby native gems. Maybe it can be set up to be cleanly automated so everything will be generated for your build target at compile time but in my currently limited time dealing with Java I've yet to see such a setup.
I would like to point out I'm no expert on JNI and have only used it twice before going all SWIG. Actually if you know of a good example or guide for JNI that could set me straight I'd love to see it.
You're talking about what we would call "managed blocks" in the systems we used. We didn't have malloc even, we literally just had a block and a pointer to the head and we'd write our own new and delete functions that would just mark or unmark sections of a map.
There are however plenty of systems that do have native new and delete that are specifically written as RTOS embedded systems. EG: ITRON which is found in a lot of automotive [sub]systems.
Generally though most embedded systems set up their memory statically, like you pointed out. Parent poster here however is referring to a media system where some blocks (like display buffers) would be static there are probably many different modes so not a single function application and not something where one globally static map would fit all cases.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you comparing specific vehicles? What SUV weighs 2500kg!? Even a loaded landcruiser is only 1,500kg. But just to humour you, a Jetta has a reported output (per-scandal number) of 144kg, whereas a CX-5 has a CO2 output of 119kg.
I'll give you that greater weight makes efficiency more difficult but I'll point out that just chip tuning for power will blast the CO2 footprint up dramatically. VW is basically selling cars that are chip tuned for performance out of the gate and making it look like they are not.
Touche! That is an excellent point.
A slight technicality: weren't most of those cities established in the original Israel?
> Similarly trying to do some historic conquest like giving back Arab land to Iran
I completely disagree with this. Arab leadership in Iran has destroyed what is a beautiful country and the uprising that brought them into power resulted in the massacre and continued victimization and oppression of a diverse range of peoples.
As for the Native Americans... I'm not so sure a lot of tribes have it all that much better than Palestinians in the Transjordan region...
I'd like to note it's even worse than that: while many "Palestinians" were content to be Jordanians it was Jordan who rejected them.
It's an unfortunate reality that the Palestinians are pawns, and much of the Arab world wants them that way. It's a case of "Heads we win, tails you loose", where if a Palestinian kills an Israeli their foreign backers share a victory in the battlefield, and if a Palestinian is killed they get to present it to the world media as Israel being the evil aggressor.
While that's entirely conjecture; it should be noted that shortly after the territories were allotted to them the infrastructure quickly fell into disrepair and some of it was actually actively demolished in a backward attempt to revolt against Israel. So, even with progress handed to them, the Palestinians did not choose it.
> because those aren't examples of "giving them enough of someone else's land"
Uh, yes they are. Arabs become dominant in those regions when they took over - how is this different other than that the re-establishment of Israel was internationally sanctioned and not a bloody conquest? If you're going to ask Israel to "give back" land to the Arabs then you're going to have to at least ask Arabs to give back land to Persians, Zorastarians / Aryans, Assyrians, etc.
??? I think you don't know the history here. This is land that was basically considered impossible to develop and Israel created methods to develop it and did so. After this is when all the sudden the "Palestinians" wanted it. Before and during the development it was a somewhat different story altogether.
> If it's not your land, it's not your land.
You're talking about land that was allotted to and developed by Israel that only later was partitioned off and artificial borders and autonomous governments put in place. Saying "If it's not your land, it's not your land." is an argument against a two-state solution.
How is this comment not modded up by now!? You've hit the nail on the head.
THIS! And the sad thing is when they decided to delay their market release SkyActiv was already more efficient than TDI. Think of all the Mazdas that would have been on the road and still desirable in the market now had they released.
In a strange twist of fate Mazda proceeded to pour tons of research funds and came out with something like a 20% peak efficiency increase after about a year.
Really though, think of all the billions VW made off of this that would have been Mazdas. THIS is why I think VW deserves maximum punishment.
Everybody who knows anything about cars has know this for years. The test environment is very specific and will always give close to "ideal" numbers for that car. EG test environments have very specific timing, very specific turns, very specific speeds etc. and data is acquired at very specific points. But the real world can never be so ideal - there's a lot more stopping, there's a lot more acceleration and deceleration, there's a lot more idling, and there's also bad drivers.
The Prius for example is a fantastic example of this, as a good Eco-conscious driver could get better gas milage in poor conditions than a driver unaware of what good Eco-driving is in ideal conditions. I recall a video where they just taught a driver about better breaking and acceleration and immediately saw nearly 30% improvement in fuel consumption. It turns out if you drive a Prius without being mindful you get close to no benefit and real world driving presents a lot of situations where you simply can't be mindful ~ EG: block-to-block stop-start city driving.
So, go f* yourself guardian, you're alarmist idiots trying to make an issue out of something we've already known.
Regardless, software does in fact have an effect on climate change. And it's certainly not limited to cars.
In a way, yes. Maybe you've seen an "eco mode" on some regular, non-eco cars. All this really does is reduce the amount the ECU opens the throttle valve relative to the amount the throttle is depressed. You can achieve the same effect simply by not pressing so hard on the accelerator [and shifting at or under 3k~ish] - which is why you hear about mindful drivers getting better gas mileage.
Of course it's much more fun to smash your throttle to the floor and shift at 8k+.
Ignition switch fraud didn't hurt the sales of other companies in the market. This is first-class fraud and it has a massive effect on the consumer, the market, and the environment. Furthermore they didn't do it once and improve their technology so they didn't have to do it anymore - they just kept the fraud going for a few consecutive models.
Buy Mazda then. They have clean diesel (SkyActive) that isn't a f*ing lie.
Tests *are* usually done through a specific test or diagnostic mode. In fact much of the test can be automated now just buy strapping the car up to a testing rig and plugging in a diagnostic computer to the OBD-II port. VW just made it so that test mode would give out fraudulent results.
And in case you were wondering test modes usually disable a lot of self-regulatory systems; meaning things like fuel efficiency and emissions will be at their worst in these modes. In a lot of vehicles this mode also happens to be the highest performance mode, which is why you'll sometimes see gear heads do a little dance with different controls to enable it when they start their cars.
Actually the points of contention here are:
1. Emergency pumps were marked as checked, but were not actually checked.
2. Diesel backup generators were probably not checked as they experienced a cascade failure when powered on.
3. Post could have been dealt with better (though this is likely more the fault of former P.M. Kann).
4. Company may have mis-used disaster management emergency funds / officials did not act in a responsible manner (EG officials did not take pay cuts / officials did not start working extra hours / generally officials did not show enough responsibility).
Particularly #4 should be looked at as there have been accidents at nuclear plants before - all previous cases had officials immediately responding to the issues ON SITE and seeing the solutions to completion personally. Companies like Touhoku Electric and Chubu Electric have shown extremely responsible oversight to the point of their CEO's taking extreme personal risks to remedy any problems and constantly going beyond government requirements for all safety measures. TEPCO on the other hand seems to be run by greedy d-bags.
You're an idiot. No such laws exist and there have been constant news stories about Fukushima and agriculture there.
There are radioactive hot-spots in many places all around the world. Just for reference none of the radioactive hot spots in Tokyo come close to the radioactivity of the famous black sand beaches in Brazil.
The vegetables from Fukushima are safer to eat then the FUD you've been stuffing down.
The rice and vegetables being discussed here are not being raised in the exclusion zone. Fukushima is a 13,780 km prefecture with a very large amount of agriculture. Less than a percent of the total land zoned for agriculture before the quake/disaster in contained in the exclusion zone.
Now please proceed to shove your FUD up your ass.
Actually food is made available in Olympic villages and outside food is often restricted due to concerns over doping. There's tons of stories relating to this from the Beijing Olympics. Usain Bolt even recalled eating nothing but chicken nuggets and cola for two days before his record run because it was the only food available he felt was safe.
1. The exclusion zone has been shrinking due to cleanup efforts.
2. The rice and vegetables being discussed here are not being raised in the exclusion zone. Fukushima is a 13,780 km prefecture with a very large amount of agriculture with. Less than a percent of the total land zoned for agriculture before the quake/disaster in contained in the exclusion zone.
Now please proceed to shove your FUD up your ass.
If you're actually wondering; yes, on several occasions the Emperor (and the Empress) have eaten both vegetables and rice from Fukushima while visiting farming communities there. Furthermore, government officials including the PM have done the same.
I'd argue that the reason for low OSS OS adoption on the desktop has much more to do with the target market. Haiku can basically exist as a little niche OS with very few users who only care about their specific hardware configurations because at the end of the day it's an OS for people who were fans of BeOS. It doesn't have some killer feature or some market it's aiming to grab.
Linux on the other hand can be made into what you want. While there are some vendors who build out to catch the desktop market there are a limited number. Furthermore, there is the question of weather or not most devs would want a larger desktop market in the first place. Why have more bug reports, more uninformed support requests, more complaining users when you don't actually monetarily benefit. If we're going to start encouraging a market where Linux will rule the desktop we need to find some way to properly pay the developers of the software that allows it to be a desktop OS.
What I don't like about JNI is how it approaches wrapper generation - essentially assuming you are writing your C/C++ code *specifically* to be used in Java. Case in point being the fact you basically have to directly modify your header files. This can of course be avoided by writing code/headers that include JNI and your native headers - but then on top of that you need to write wrapper headers and wrapper code. Most other wrapper systems don't make this assumption and just let you write an interface or some wrapper code and be done with it.
On top of that actual generation of the wrapped binaries isn't nearly as smooth and integrated as say Ruby native gems. Maybe it can be set up to be cleanly automated so everything will be generated for your build target at compile time but in my currently limited time dealing with Java I've yet to see such a setup.
I would like to point out I'm no expert on JNI and have only used it twice before going all SWIG. Actually if you know of a good example or guide for JNI that could set me straight I'd love to see it.
You're talking about what we would call "managed blocks" in the systems we used. We didn't have malloc even, we literally just had a block and a pointer to the head and we'd write our own new and delete functions that would just mark or unmark sections of a map.
There are however plenty of systems that do have native new and delete that are specifically written as RTOS embedded systems. EG: ITRON which is found in a lot of automotive [sub]systems.
Generally though most embedded systems set up their memory statically, like you pointed out. Parent poster here however is referring to a media system where some blocks (like display buffers) would be static there are probably many different modes so not a single function application and not something where one globally static map would fit all cases.