The psychology of being subjected to movement with no visual reference (vomit tube)
In a high-speed train, by contrast, you hardly notice anything. In a TGV, 300 km/h feels like standing still Hyperloop.... should be a very smooth ride.
Unless the Hyperloop is dead straight there will be lateral and vertical accelerations as it takes curves* and changes of gradient. At such high speed, the builders will need to push these to near the limit of average human tolerance, for example to skirt round geographical features (villages, cities, hills), minimise tunnelling and viaducts, or, when underground, avoid geological difficulties.
I have never ridden the TGV myself, but those who have tell me there is quite a bit of "hump-back-bridge" sensation as it tops rises or bottoms dips. Indivuduals vary, but if I ever ride on Hyperloop I shall book a seat at the rear of the pod to avoid the worst of the projection vomit.
* Yes, yes, curves can be countered by banking, but that turns the lateral acceleration into vertical acceleration for the passenger instead.
In fact I've just checked and as I suspected there is no direct train between the Welsh and Scottish capitals, despite both places having loads of direct train services to other destinations. How about Musk sponsoring a direct high speed train service on this route to assess the demand before he throws billions on a Hyperlink (in his dreams anyway)?
He does not seem to know much about the UK either. A Hyperloop between Wales and Scotland? Very little traffic there. I live in one of the more populated areas of Wales and I've never come across anyone around here who travels to Scotland on any regular basis. It would be even less so if Scotland gets independence.
As an Engineer, I always see solutions to problems. I always thought that was the point of the job.
As an engineer I also see solutions to problems, but I also see their costs. All options have problems, but it is part of an engineers job to rule out those options with costs outweighing the advantages. Hyperloop is one of those, but as long as a billionaire nutter is paying engineers to work on it come-what-may, they will do so.
Whilst hyperloop may be orders of magnitude cheaper per route km...
Lay off the Kool-aid if I were you. Why should a railway in a vacuum tunbe be cheaper to build than a railway not in a vacuum tube? (Yes, yes, I know Musk and his fans don't like it called a "railway". OK, "Guided public transport", whatever).
In fact it will involve far more expensive civil engineering because at its speed the curvature in both horizontal and vertical planes will need to be very very gentle - much more so than with conventional railways. So expect either mostly tunnels, or massive cuttings and viaducts. Those support pylons, that people keep glossing over as if it were a contour-hugging oil pipe, will need to be hundreds of feet high in some places.
Another billionaire's toy. It must be hard not knowing how to get rid of that money. Why didn't Brewster think of this idea? At least there is none of my money in it - I've never bought any Microsoft stuff.
.. gasoline cars do not have to pay the costs directly. Instead, the costs of their choice are socialized to everybody. If gasoline users had to pay enough gas taxes to cover all the costs associated with their use of gasoline that market would evaporate in a couple of years.
Tell me how (in the UK at least) the costs of my gasoline choice (as opposed to electric cars) are "socialised to everybody". EVs are practically exempt from running tax in the UK while I am paying about 0.1 GBP per mile in annual excise duty plus about 0.14 GBP per mile tax on the fuel; about 1200 GBP per year for me. How is this spent on "costs associated" with my use of gasoline? I am massively subsidising EVs, which need just the same road mantenance, policing, signage etc.
No they take ideas invented by others without much understanding of whether they are viable or not, no matter how crackpot, and blow some money on it. When you have got a few billion dollars it does not matter if you waste a few million, as long as you get a quick thrill and your name into the news.
Back in the Zeppelin days they found that the safest way to anchor one was to attach the nose to a mast. That way it could trail downwind. This thing is going to need an anchor mast the size of the Eiffel tower... well perhaps not quite that big, but you are not going to find one of those "anywhere".
Not quite..... Microsoft jumped ship, deciding instead to continue with the Windows branding and abandon the OS/2 marque. They were already working on OS/2 2.0 which they took and re-branded as Windows NT.
Not quite. WinNT was not a re-branding of OS/2, although it is believed that it had a bit (perhaps quite a bit) of OS/2 code in it. NT was mostly written by a team headed by Dave Cutler who (and most of the team) had been poached from DEC for the purpose. It is also believed that Cutler's team brought a bit (perhaps quite a bit) of VMS code from DEC. DEC threatened to sue Microsoft over the poaching of Dave Cutler and team, but they settled out of court; it was really the end for DEC anyway.
OS/2 Warp was an OS released by IBM to compete with Microsoft DOS in the late eighties.
Who modded this codswallop as "Informative"?
DOS was old hat by the time WARP was released (1994, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...). By then OS/2 was competing against Windows, in particular Windows NT.
I've some news for you and the modders, albeit nearly 30 years too late:- OS/2 in the late 80's was jointly developed by IBM and Microsoft themselves, to replace DOS, not rival it. There were several versions of OS/2 before Warp, by which time Microsoft had split from IBM and gone off to develop WIndows. It is thought that there was a fair bit of OS/2 code in Windows NT.
You are not the only poster who seems to think that OS/2 was always called Warp. Only versions 3 and 4 had that name.
I tried Warp back in the day, and I liked it a lot.......Not long after that Windows 3.0 came out.... Warp was technically better but Windows took over the market and that was the end of that.
Your long term memory is failing OldGuy. Windows 3.0 came out in 1990 and Warp (OS/2 v3.0) came out four years later. But OS/2 should not be compared with WIndows 3.x or 9x, they had entirely different types of user. OS/2's equivalent and rival was Windows NT which first appeared in 1993, by which time OS/2 v2.0 (the first decent version) had been out for a year already. OS/2 and NT were systems for servers and power users.
I can see what APK looks like! After all this time I thought he would look so different.
From the date of his post on that page, he must be at least 10 years older than that by now. He is seen looking down his nose at us. His writing style is unmistakable.
Most people that run Linux do so because they cannot afford to spend money on a professionally written OS.
Windows comes with most PCs so Linux users could run it with no expenditure anyway, but choose not to except maybe to dual boot it for games. these people
aren't going to be throwing money around chasing after their files either; they didn't have any to start with.
They might have more money, saved from not spending it on Windows apps and earlier Windows-based scams. FWIW, I've got plenty of money but it does not mean I'm happy to give it to Gates or Wannacry, shits all of them.
Windows is targeted because it's popular. If we all switched to Linux as our primary workstation at home and work, it would be just as targeted.... the argument to move away from one insecure platform to another platform which is probably just as insecure isn't one I find very motivating.
I find your argument curious. The motivation discussed here (there may be others) is the fact that Linux is not popular, because as you say it is less likely to be targeted. (Assuming for the sake of argumant that their inherent vulnerabilies are equal). Of course you could question the sense of the guy evangelising Linux on these grounds as it could be self-defeating.
An analogy: if everyone in the world sat on the same chair as I am on, I'd be crushed to death. So should I not sit on it?
Theresa May's party might win and she might not actually get elected in her constituency - at that point she could NOT be Prime Minister.
Yes she could. It is not a PM's job requirement to be a member of parliament, either in the Commons or the Lords. In 1963 Alec Douglas-Home was PM for a time in that position. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
What would happen is that a Tory in a safe seat would resign, a by-election would ensue in which May would be the Tory candidate and win.
The British Prime Minister is actually chosen by the Queen. Don't worry, she won't choose you or me.
The only thing that is needed is for parents to.... explain that these are models and athletes and that no, real people do not perform like that or have an anatomy like that and real sex works a bit differently.
Are you speaking for yourself or for all of us?
That done, any possible harm vanishes.
Wow, that's easy then. Any ideas how to solve world hunger while you are on a roll?
Except having to conform to their numerous orders. Just one example, banning creosote for tarring fences; maybe irrelevant to you (or to EU residents in sunny Spain and Italy, or basement dwellers) ) but a big deal for me as I maintain several hundred yards of fencing in the damp misty hills of Wales. They are taking big chunks of time out of my life.
[Brexiters will] fall all over themselves contorting into some explanation as to why they support a totalitarian wannabe like May, just because they'll get their precious withdrawal from the EU.
May is merely implementing the result of the referendum. The Brexit-Bremain split is largely orthogonal to the Tory-Labour split. One of the strongest Brexit areas is the South Wales valleys, a working class, Labour supporting, former coal-mining area.
I am a Brexiter and I don't particularly support the Tories, not since that Thatcher bitch destroyed most of British manufacturing, nor Labour since that Blair bastard destroyed the rest. All the main parties are now Thatcherite. I vote for smaller parties, UKIP last time.
Honestly, this feels like Tesla wanting to build it's own subway.
It does not "feel like", it is.
The stupid part about this scheme is the lifts to get cars down to its level. They are going to be a serious bottleneck. Without knowing the details I guess they will be on a side loop which peels off and then rejoins the main lane at speed, but even so it is going to a big delay if you are in the queue for it, and if that queue is underground to get back to the surface, the tailback will stretch back into the main lane and bring it to a halt, defeating the object (ditto the street above). Think of a conventional subway/underground-railway, accessed by a lift that only one passenger can use at a time.
This system will work fine as long as only a handful of billionaires want to use it.
Musk has abandoned doing serious things. He just enjoys playing with big toys and seeing his own face in the media.
Irrespective of the size of the olfactory bulb, my dog can smell loads more than I can. We often walk in a forest, and for example I might see a deer ahead just over a rise, which my small dog does not (he'd go beserk he did). When we reach the spot where the deer was he does go beserk, pulling left and right (the direction the deer crossed the path), which can only be based on the deer's scent. I can't smell anything except grass and leaves, not even if I get down to his level.
Slashdot Mirror
The psychology of being subjected to movement with no visual reference (vomit tube)
In a high-speed train, by contrast, you hardly notice anything. In a TGV, 300 km/h feels like standing still Hyperloop .... should be a very smooth ride.
Unless the Hyperloop is dead straight there will be lateral and vertical accelerations as it takes curves* and changes of gradient. At such high speed, the builders will need to push these to near the limit of average human tolerance, for example to skirt round geographical features (villages, cities, hills), minimise tunnelling and viaducts, or, when underground, avoid geological difficulties.
I have never ridden the TGV myself, but those who have tell me there is quite a bit of "hump-back-bridge" sensation as it tops rises or bottoms dips. Indivuduals vary, but if I ever ride on Hyperloop I shall book a seat at the rear of the pod to avoid the worst of the projection vomit.
* Yes, yes, curves can be countered by banking, but that turns the lateral acceleration into vertical acceleration for the passenger instead.
In fact I've just checked and as I suspected there is no direct train between the Welsh and Scottish capitals, despite both places having loads of direct train services to other destinations. How about Musk sponsoring a direct high speed train service on this route to assess the demand before he throws billions on a Hyperlink (in his dreams anyway)?
He does not seem to know much about the UK either. A Hyperloop between Wales and Scotland? Very little traffic there. I live in one of the more populated areas of Wales and I've never come across anyone around here who travels to Scotland on any regular basis. It would be even less so if Scotland gets independence.
As an Engineer, I always see solutions to problems. I always thought that was the point of the job.
As an engineer I also see solutions to problems, but I also see their costs. All options have problems, but it is part of an engineers job to rule out those options with costs outweighing the advantages. Hyperloop is one of those, but as long as a billionaire nutter is paying engineers to work on it come-what-may, they will do so.
I can't see this happening in the UK fortunately
FTFY
Whilst hyperloop may be orders of magnitude cheaper per route km ...
Lay off the Kool-aid if I were you. Why should a railway in a vacuum tunbe be cheaper to build than a railway not in a vacuum tube? (Yes, yes, I know Musk and his fans don't like it called a "railway". OK, "Guided public transport", whatever).
In fact it will involve far more expensive civil engineering because at its speed the curvature in both horizontal and vertical planes will need to be very very gentle - much more so than with conventional railways. So expect either mostly tunnels, or massive cuttings and viaducts. Those support pylons, that people keep glossing over as if it were a contour-hugging oil pipe, will need to be hundreds of feet high in some places.
Another billionaire's toy. It must be hard not knowing how to get rid of that money. Why didn't Brewster think of this idea? At least there is none of my money in it - I've never bought any Microsoft stuff.
But perhaps he got the money from sueing the World plus Dog http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
.. gasoline cars do not have to pay the costs directly. Instead, the costs of their choice are socialized to everybody. If gasoline users had to pay enough gas taxes to cover all the costs associated with their use of gasoline that market would evaporate in a couple of years.
Tell me how (in the UK at least) the costs of my gasoline choice (as opposed to electric cars) are "socialised to everybody". EVs are practically exempt from running tax in the UK while I am paying about 0.1 GBP per mile in annual excise duty plus about 0.14 GBP per mile tax on the fuel; about 1200 GBP per year for me. How is this spent on "costs associated" with my use of gasoline? I am massively subsidising EVs, which need just the same road mantenance, policing, signage etc.
Yeah, they invent things.
No they take ideas invented by others without much understanding of whether they are viable or not, no matter how crackpot, and blow some money on it. When you have got a few billion dollars it does not matter if you waste a few million, as long as you get a quick thrill and your name into the news.
I doubt that it will go anywhere.
Back in the Zeppelin days they found that the safest way to anchor one was to attach the nose to a mast. That way it could trail downwind. This thing is going to need an anchor mast the size of the Eiffel tower ... well perhaps not quite that big, but you are not going to find one of those "anywhere".
We can make as much hydrogen as he needs.
Sure and it's inflammable as hell too.
Perfect for Brins then.
Not quite..... Microsoft jumped ship, deciding instead to continue with the Windows branding and abandon the OS/2 marque. They were already working on OS/2 2.0 which they took and re-branded as Windows NT.
Not quite. WinNT was not a re-branding of OS/2, although it is believed that it had a bit (perhaps quite a bit) of OS/2 code in it. NT was mostly written by a team headed by Dave Cutler who (and most of the team) had been poached from DEC for the purpose. It is also believed that Cutler's team brought a bit (perhaps quite a bit) of VMS code from DEC. DEC threatened to sue Microsoft over the poaching of Dave Cutler and team, but they settled out of court; it was really the end for DEC anyway.
OS/2 Warp was an OS released by IBM to compete with Microsoft DOS in the late eighties.
Who modded this codswallop as "Informative"?
DOS was old hat by the time WARP was released (1994, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...). By then OS/2 was competing against Windows, in particular Windows NT.
I've some news for you and the modders, albeit nearly 30 years too late :- OS/2 in the late 80's was jointly developed by IBM and Microsoft themselves, to replace DOS, not rival it. There were several versions of OS/2 before Warp, by which time Microsoft had split from IBM and gone off to develop WIndows. It is thought that there was a fair bit of OS/2 code in Windows NT.
You are not the only poster who seems to think that OS/2 was always called Warp. Only versions 3 and 4 had that name.
JustAnotherOldGuy wrote :
I tried Warp back in the day, and I liked it a lot.......Not long after that Windows 3.0 came out .... Warp was technically better but Windows took over the market and that was the end of that.
Your long term memory is failing OldGuy. Windows 3.0 came out in 1990 and Warp (OS/2 v3.0) came out four years later. But OS/2 should not be compared with WIndows 3.x or 9x, they had entirely different types of user. OS/2's equivalent and rival was Windows NT which first appeared in 1993, by which time OS/2 v2.0 (the first decent version) had been out for a year already. OS/2 and NT were systems for servers and power users.
I can see what APK looks like! After all this time I thought he would look so different.
From the date of his post on that page, he must be at least 10 years older than that by now. He is seen looking down his nose at us. His writing style is unmistakable.
Most people that run Linux do so because they cannot afford to spend money on a professionally written OS.
Windows comes with most PCs so Linux users could run it with no expenditure anyway, but choose not to except maybe to dual boot it for games. these people
aren't going to be throwing money around chasing after their files either; they didn't have any to start with.
They might have more money, saved from not spending it on Windows apps and earlier Windows-based scams. FWIW, I've got plenty of money but it does not mean I'm happy to give it to Gates or Wannacry, shits all of them.
Windows is targeted because it's popular. If we all switched to Linux as our primary workstation at home and work, it would be just as targeted. ... the argument to move away from one insecure platform to another platform which is probably just as insecure isn't one I find very motivating.
I find your argument curious. The motivation discussed here (there may be others) is the fact that Linux is not popular, because as you say it is less likely to be targeted. (Assuming for the sake of argumant that their inherent vulnerabilies are equal). Of course you could question the sense of the guy evangelising Linux on these grounds as it could be self-defeating.
An analogy: if everyone in the world sat on the same chair as I am on, I'd be crushed to death. So should I not sit on it?
Theresa May's party might win and she might not actually get elected in her constituency - at that point she could NOT be Prime Minister.
Yes she could. It is not a PM's job requirement to be a member of parliament, either in the Commons or the Lords. In 1963 Alec Douglas-Home was PM for a time in that position. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
What would happen is that a Tory in a safe seat would resign, a by-election would ensue in which May would be the Tory candidate and win.
The British Prime Minister is actually chosen by the Queen. Don't worry, she won't choose you or me.
The only thing that is needed is for parents to .... explain that these are models and athletes and that no, real people do not perform like that or have an anatomy like that and real sex works a bit differently.
Are you speaking for yourself or for all of us?
That done, any possible harm vanishes.
Wow, that's easy then. Any ideas how to solve world hunger while you are on a roll?
ho for fucks sake, we never lost power to EU.
Except having to conform to their numerous orders. Just one example, banning creosote for tarring fences; maybe irrelevant to you (or to EU residents in sunny Spain and Italy, or basement dwellers) ) but a big deal for me as I maintain several hundred yards of fencing in the damp misty hills of Wales. They are taking big chunks of time out of my life.
[Brexiters will] fall all over themselves contorting into some explanation as to why they support a totalitarian wannabe like May, just because they'll get their precious withdrawal from the EU.
FYI, May was a Bremainer. http://www.euronews.com/2016/0...
May is merely implementing the result of the referendum. The Brexit-Bremain split is largely orthogonal to the Tory-Labour split. One of the strongest Brexit areas is the South Wales valleys, a working class, Labour supporting, former coal-mining area.
I am a Brexiter and I don't particularly support the Tories, not since that Thatcher bitch destroyed most of British manufacturing, nor Labour since that Blair bastard destroyed the rest. All the main parties are now Thatcherite. I vote for smaller parties, UKIP last time.
Phasing out cash is a great tool to get alternative barter systems going.
Mod this up. Bartering will spring up inevitably within any "cashless" society.
Government doesn't care a shit if you buy bunny-fur bondage gear or pay strippers.
But my wife does, and she sees the credit card bills.
Honestly, this feels like Tesla wanting to build it's own subway.
It does not "feel like", it is.
The stupid part about this scheme is the lifts to get cars down to its level. They are going to be a serious bottleneck. Without knowing the details I guess they will be on a side loop which peels off and then rejoins the main lane at speed, but even so it is going to a big delay if you are in the queue for it, and if that queue is underground to get back to the surface, the tailback will stretch back into the main lane and bring it to a halt, defeating the object (ditto the street above). Think of a conventional subway/underground-railway, accessed by a lift that only one passenger can use at a time.
This system will work fine as long as only a handful of billionaires want to use it.
Musk has abandoned doing serious things. He just enjoys playing with big toys and seeing his own face in the media.
Irrespective of the size of the olfactory bulb, my dog can smell loads more than I can. We often walk in a forest, and for example I might see a deer ahead just over a rise, which my small dog does not (he'd go beserk he did). When we reach the spot where the deer was he does go beserk, pulling left and right (the direction the deer crossed the path), which can only be based on the deer's scent. I can't smell anything except grass and leaves, not even if I get down to his level.
Some of these scientists need to get out more.
Don't worry, there are plenty of con artists in the UK.
Certainly, and there are plenty of Indians. They have taken it to a new level.
This is the very first Google result I found. They even tried to bribe the jury.