Small speakers *cannot* reproduce significant bass. It has to do with air mass movement and the physics of sound. Small radiators are only efficients with short wavelengths - the wavelength of bass-frequency waves is too long for a laptop-sized speaker to effectively reproduce it. Audiophiles are idiots, and quoting them is no ammo at all in any argument about sound. These are the same people who think a green marker improves the sound of their CDs.
I have, in fact, been in a hotel, and in noisy environments. However, laptop speakers do not fit my definition of "acceptable sounding when turned up as loud as they go", which is what's necessary in said loud environment, so I usually either bring headphones, a splitter cable, or speakers, depending on if I expect company (and how much). I can, however, honestly say that I have never encountered a situation where my laptop speakers weren't loud enough for the situation at hand - generally, if background noise is high enough to drown out laptop speakers, even fairly cheap ones, then I'm probably somewhere where I'm not interested in having the laptop out for a movie. I mean, seriously, where the hell is it so loud as to drown out the laptop, but you'd still want to have 25 friends sitting around a laptop watching a movie?
And if people want to listen to music at the beach, I bring an extension cord and the kilowatt PA. If they want to listen to music, listen to *music*. Don't try and bullshit it with crappy laptop speakers, as there are no other kind. You can have more crappy (Dell), medium crappy (Apple), or less crappy (actually, never found anything that I would accept as this category). There is no such thing as a GOOD laptop speaker.
And h/k is overpriced crap, for the most part. You probably have Bose speakers at home, too.
It's the one where the anti-virus firms run away from Earth when the virus writers destroy it because they're afraid of the Antivirus project, and then the descendents of the AV firms have to find the good ship Antivirus and use it to blow up the skriptkiddies, right?
And it has John Travolta as a talking llama. Wait, no. Talking lamer. But that's just the way it is.
We ain't perfect, but I work in the industry, and I do safety testing and watch as we do more after I'm done with major design. I dislike the insinuation that the majority of engineers don't care about safety, when the truth is that most of us do in fact want to make good products.
Most likely the flaw was discovered by Ford in testing, and they decided (accountant-wise, not engineer-wise) that it would be cheaper to pay off families than to scrap the design.
Again, I'm not saying we don't miss things, but I dislike the casting of aspersions on my profession when those aspersions are generally unwarranted.
Try it over component. The difference from composite to s-video is much more noticeable than the difference from s-video to component, but its still a noticeable difference.
Mmm. PS2 games over component on HDTV set. So nice. Must play Katamari Damacy. So nice.
Sure. If you don't like having working flash in your processor. Last time I worked on a e500-cored processor (Copperhead/MPC5554, Augustish), they were having some pretty serious yield problems - lots of good logic cores, but very few with working flash. I haven't heard anything to suggest an improvement since August.
Also on a Apple Laptop, you can't get... True Subwoofer Sound System
You can't get a "true subwoofer" on any laptop. Physics says so, and you can't argue with physics.
And ironically features that PC users have taken for granted on laptops for years now still are 'unavailable' on any Mac Laptop. Just like back in the late 90s, I was horrified that the stylish and 'in' Apple notebooks didn't even have stereo speakers, what is Apple thinking sometimes?
I don't know. Maybe they were thinking "Hey! Headphones!"
I'm going to use a solid disc rather than try to deal with calculating blades, as a solid disc is higher mass and therefore higher inertia than a bladed construction, so my calculation will be erring on the side of caution.
Assuming the (very rough) idea of the blades as a solid disc, a 10 mm turbine blade (which is what is suggested for a 20 W turbine, running at 100krpm, from other experimental papers I've seen) comes out as follows:
I =.5m*r^2 =.5*25*10^-6*mass
Density of silicon nitride, a commonly mentioned blade material, is 3.28 g/cc.
Volume of a solid disc 10 mm blade, assuming it is 1 mm in thickness (a value pulled from some of the experimental papers), would be pi*r^2*h, giving us pi*25*10^-6*1*10^-3, or 2.5*10^-8 m^3.
2.5*10^-8 m^3 is 2.5*10^-2 cm^3, yielding a mass of 3.28*2.5*10^-2, or 8.2*10^-2 grams, which is 8.2*10^-5 kg.
Thus, moment of inertia is.5*25*10^-6*8.2*10^-5, or 1.025*10^-8 kg*m^2.
The correct equation for energy is.5Iw^2.
So, at 100krpm (2*pi*100000/60 rads/s), the turbine I'm thinking of is carrying:.5*1.025*10^-8*109662271 = 0.562019139 J.
Even if its spinning at 1 million RPM, we get:.5*1.025*10^-8*1.09662271*10^10 = 56.2019139 J.
TNT explodes with an energy of 2.175*10^6 J/kg, meaning that the turbine disintegrating at 1 million would yield something roughly equivalent to 0.025 grams of TNT. Not exactly a big explosion.
Yes, it is spinning very, very fast, but it is also very very small and very very light. These counterbalance the speed.
Not necessarily - 48V is far from a done deal. There are issues (arcing, for one thing). It may well happen eventually, but I wouldn't look for it to become mainstream anytime in the next couple years - probably not until hybrid adoption reaches critical mass, or until someone develops a good camless system, since those will probably require higher voltages.
You've obviously never worked for the auto industry. They don't really like to spend money. A whole duplicate copy of an airbag module that might cost 40 bucks from the supplier? Yeah, right.
But for the most part, safety-critical systems, although not redundant, do have watchdogs and similar built in. Its better than nothing.
From experience, Linux (a heavily, heavily modified version) might make it into some of the more complex body modules, but probably one of the RT versions that basically runs Linux as a RT job under (IIRC) VxWorks.
But yeah, I'm not expecting to see Linux in an engine controller any time soon - no one trusts it enough.
No, I'm pointing out that many of the tests that were subsequently mandated by law are things engineers would run as due diligence - except when accountants and marketing forced us to put out products before we wanted to. Same story as anywhere else.
I just don't like it when people imply that we're (automotive engineers) intentionally careless with the lives of people by not trying our very best to make safe products - and not because of the law, because we're fucking human.
Windows doesn't "power" any cars; it runs some telematics systems, but it definitely doesn't run any EMS systems I'm aware of (and I work for a large powertrain electronics supplier, so I have some knowledge here).
Most EMS' I've seen run on OSEK (DC particularly likes OSEK) or VxWorks. A few run on home-written RTOSes (mostly written by Russian coders).
Newspaper journalism is literally printing things. Publishing is part of it; a reporter who never publishes isn't much of a reporter, after all.
And you're right: there's no special freedom of newspapers. It's simply that anyone has a right to become "the press", to become a journalist and publisher. The government cannot abridge the right to research and publish; this, essentially, is the press.
Broadcast media falls under a slightly different regime (speech) because it is an instantaneous medium; the reporter isn't creating a fixed object like a newspaperman or an investigative author, he's creating a performance. The law recognizes differences between the two (the aforementioned press vs. speech).
Please, read my comment before reacting. Broadcast journalism is speech, print journalism is freedom of the press (and speech as well, but the press is important here). And there is no special class of "the press" - the law protects the action, but the action makes the profession.
Considering I spent a few years acquiring a practicing knowledge of law as relating to broadcast media and as it relates to journalism in general, I think I might have read the law - not just the amendment, which is admirably broad in definition, but the case law and precedent used to define its span and strength.
For at least some of the ones I saw Jason record, he was. Remember that its pretty much just the labor of love for one guy - interviews, editing, etc was all just him.
If you ever get a chance to hear him talk about BBS/computer history, go see it. He gives an entertaining speech.
Considering that the profession literally is "printing things", that subsequent court interpretation has held that the amendment is, in fact, intended to apply to journalists (and other writers), and that Thomas Paine uses it to refer to newspapermen (a link, for the skeptical) I'd say grandparent has a solid case.
And you're correct: Jon Stewart's profession is protected, but not specifically, just as a general portion of freedom of speech. Journalism is, essentially, named specifically, as part of the class of those who print things for public consumption; they fall under a combination of freedom of speech (write whatever they want) and freedom of the press (print it, too).
Actually, just buy the Airport Express. Then use it from the existing control machine, whatever it may be, to run iTunes. No need for a Mac, just use the Windows machine they almost certainly already have.
I mean, I can only imagine his head would have imploded after Jon got done deflating him. Plus, we would have gotten a repeat of the "douchebag of liberty" comment, truly one of the funniest (and sadly, most accurate) comments on the partisan 'journalism' going on these days I've seen.
Daily Show averages over a million, and can draw over 2 million on special events (post-debate, Kerry, McCain, etc.)
That said, I don't usually watch, but it gets discussed at the office. People ask "Hey, did you see the Daily Show last night?" They talk about it. You don't necessarily have to have people watching you to have influence, if you can get people to talk about you outside of your time slot.
Cruithne and 2002AA29 are co-orbital objects, not exactly moons (depending on your definition of moon).
At any rate, the energy required to normalize their orbits into standard elliptical/circular orbits around the Earth (as opposed to Cruithne's 385-year orbit which only happens to include the Earth due to eccentricity in the orbit, or 2002AA29's horseshoe orbit which is even stranger) is extremely high.
Slashdot Mirror
Small speakers *cannot* reproduce significant bass. It has to do with air mass movement and the physics of sound. Small radiators are only efficients with short wavelengths - the wavelength of bass-frequency waves is too long for a laptop-sized speaker to effectively reproduce it. Audiophiles are idiots, and quoting them is no ammo at all in any argument about sound. These are the same people who think a green marker improves the sound of their CDs.
I have, in fact, been in a hotel, and in noisy environments. However, laptop speakers do not fit my definition of "acceptable sounding when turned up as loud as they go", which is what's necessary in said loud environment, so I usually either bring headphones, a splitter cable, or speakers, depending on if I expect company (and how much). I can, however, honestly say that I have never encountered a situation where my laptop speakers weren't loud enough for the situation at hand - generally, if background noise is high enough to drown out laptop speakers, even fairly cheap ones, then I'm probably somewhere where I'm not interested in having the laptop out for a movie. I mean, seriously, where the hell is it so loud as to drown out the laptop, but you'd still want to have 25 friends sitting around a laptop watching a movie?
And if people want to listen to music at the beach, I bring an extension cord and the kilowatt PA. If they want to listen to music, listen to *music*. Don't try and bullshit it with crappy laptop speakers, as there are no other kind. You can have more crappy (Dell), medium crappy (Apple), or less crappy (actually, never found anything that I would accept as this category). There is no such thing as a GOOD laptop speaker.
And h/k is overpriced crap, for the most part. You probably have Bose speakers at home, too.
It's the one where the anti-virus firms run away from Earth when the virus writers destroy it because they're afraid of the Antivirus project, and then the descendents of the AV firms have to find the good ship Antivirus and use it to blow up the skriptkiddies, right?
And it has John Travolta as a talking llama. Wait, no. Talking lamer. But that's just the way it is.
We ain't perfect, but I work in the industry, and I do safety testing and watch as we do more after I'm done with major design. I dislike the insinuation that the majority of engineers don't care about safety, when the truth is that most of us do in fact want to make good products.
Most likely the flaw was discovered by Ford in testing, and they decided (accountant-wise, not engineer-wise) that it would be cheaper to pay off families than to scrap the design.
Again, I'm not saying we don't miss things, but I dislike the casting of aspersions on my profession when those aspersions are generally unwarranted.
Try it over component. The difference from composite to s-video is much more noticeable than the difference from s-video to component, but its still a noticeable difference.
Mmm. PS2 games over component on HDTV set. So nice. Must play Katamari Damacy. So nice.
If you think the e500 is shipping now, well...
Sure. If you don't like having working flash in your processor. Last time I worked on a e500-cored processor (Copperhead/MPC5554, Augustish), they were having some pretty serious yield problems - lots of good logic cores, but very few with working flash. I haven't heard anything to suggest an improvement since August.
Also on a Apple Laptop, you can't get... True Subwoofer Sound System
You can't get a "true subwoofer" on any laptop. Physics says so, and you can't argue with physics.
And ironically features that PC users have taken for granted on laptops for years now still are 'unavailable' on any Mac Laptop. Just like back in the late 90s, I was horrified that the stylish and 'in' Apple notebooks didn't even have stereo speakers, what is Apple thinking sometimes?
I don't know. Maybe they were thinking "Hey! Headphones!"
I'm going to use a solid disc rather than try to deal with calculating blades, as a solid disc is higher mass and therefore higher inertia than a bladed construction, so my calculation will be erring on the side of caution.
.5m*r^2 = .5*25*10^-6*mass
.5*25*10^-6*8.2*10^-5, or 1.025*10^-8 kg*m^2.
.5Iw^2.
.5*1.025*10^-8*109662271 = 0.562019139 J.
.5*1.025*10^-8*1.09662271*10^10 = 56.2019139 J.
Assuming the (very rough) idea of the blades as a solid disc, a 10 mm turbine blade (which is what is suggested for a 20 W turbine, running at 100krpm, from other experimental papers I've seen) comes out as follows:
I =
Density of silicon nitride, a commonly mentioned blade material, is 3.28 g/cc.
Volume of a solid disc 10 mm blade, assuming it is 1 mm in thickness (a value pulled from some of the experimental papers), would be pi*r^2*h, giving us pi*25*10^-6*1*10^-3, or 2.5*10^-8 m^3.
2.5*10^-8 m^3 is 2.5*10^-2 cm^3, yielding a mass of 3.28*2.5*10^-2, or 8.2*10^-2 grams, which is 8.2*10^-5 kg.
Thus, moment of inertia is
The correct equation for energy is
So, at 100krpm (2*pi*100000/60 rads/s), the turbine I'm thinking of is carrying:
Even if its spinning at 1 million RPM, we get:
TNT explodes with an energy of 2.175*10^6 J/kg, meaning that the turbine disintegrating at 1 million would yield something roughly equivalent to 0.025 grams of TNT. Not exactly a big explosion.
Yes, it is spinning very, very fast, but it is also very very small and very very light. These counterbalance the speed.
Not necessarily - 48V is far from a done deal. There are issues (arcing, for one thing). It may well happen eventually, but I wouldn't look for it to become mainstream anytime in the next couple years - probably not until hybrid adoption reaches critical mass, or until someone develops a good camless system, since those will probably require higher voltages.
Quite often, actually. 24 Hour Party People could have gone far more into depth and I would have been happier, for example. Scratch, too.
But then, I like to actually *know* depth about a subject, not just a cursory overview.
You've obviously never worked for the auto industry. They don't really like to spend money. A whole duplicate copy of an airbag module that might cost 40 bucks from the supplier? Yeah, right.
But for the most part, safety-critical systems, although not redundant, do have watchdogs and similar built in. Its better than nothing.
From experience, Linux (a heavily, heavily modified version) might make it into some of the more complex body modules, but probably one of the RT versions that basically runs Linux as a RT job under (IIRC) VxWorks.
But yeah, I'm not expecting to see Linux in an engine controller any time soon - no one trusts it enough.
No, I'm pointing out that many of the tests that were subsequently mandated by law are things engineers would run as due diligence - except when accountants and marketing forced us to put out products before we wanted to. Same story as anywhere else.
I just don't like it when people imply that we're (automotive engineers) intentionally careless with the lives of people by not trying our very best to make safe products - and not because of the law, because we're fucking human.
Windows doesn't "power" any cars; it runs some telematics systems, but it definitely doesn't run any EMS systems I'm aware of (and I work for a large powertrain electronics supplier, so I have some knowledge here).
Most EMS' I've seen run on OSEK (DC particularly likes OSEK) or VxWorks. A few run on home-written RTOSes (mostly written by Russian coders).
Or, you know, engineers who don't want people to DIE because they didn't test their product.
Thanks for trivializing our morals, ass.
Newspaper journalism is literally printing things. Publishing is part of it; a reporter who never publishes isn't much of a reporter, after all.
And you're right: there's no special freedom of newspapers. It's simply that anyone has a right to become "the press", to become a journalist and publisher. The government cannot abridge the right to research and publish; this, essentially, is the press.
Broadcast media falls under a slightly different regime (speech) because it is an instantaneous medium; the reporter isn't creating a fixed object like a newspaperman or an investigative author, he's creating a performance. The law recognizes differences between the two (the aforementioned press vs. speech).
Please, read my comment before reacting. Broadcast journalism is speech, print journalism is freedom of the press (and speech as well, but the press is important here). And there is no special class of "the press" - the law protects the action, but the action makes the profession.
Considering I spent a few years acquiring a practicing knowledge of law as relating to broadcast media and as it relates to journalism in general, I think I might have read the law - not just the amendment, which is admirably broad in definition, but the case law and precedent used to define its span and strength.
Last time I talked to Jason, he mentioned he had something like 200-300 hours worth of interview footage. This was around a year ago.
And it is in an episodic format.
For at least some of the ones I saw Jason record, he was. Remember that its pretty much just the labor of love for one guy - interviews, editing, etc was all just him.
If you ever get a chance to hear him talk about BBS/computer history, go see it. He gives an entertaining speech.
Considering that the profession literally is "printing things", that subsequent court interpretation has held that the amendment is, in fact, intended to apply to journalists (and other writers), and that Thomas Paine uses it to refer to newspapermen (a link, for the skeptical) I'd say grandparent has a solid case.
And you're correct: Jon Stewart's profession is protected, but not specifically, just as a general portion of freedom of speech. Journalism is, essentially, named specifically, as part of the class of those who print things for public consumption; they fall under a combination of freedom of speech (write whatever they want) and freedom of the press (print it, too).
Actually, just buy the Airport Express. Then use it from the existing control machine, whatever it may be, to run iTunes. No need for a Mac, just use the Windows machine they almost certainly already have.
Perhaps he was argumentative with Giuliani because he lives in NYC, and a lot of New Yorkers DESPISE Giuliani?
Yeah, well, I was hoping for Novak on the right.
I mean, I can only imagine his head would have imploded after Jon got done deflating him. Plus, we would have gotten a repeat of the "douchebag of liberty" comment, truly one of the funniest (and sadly, most accurate) comments on the partisan 'journalism' going on these days I've seen.
Amendment one, freedom of the press. Specifically, "or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press"
Jesus Christ. The First Amendment is not just free speech. There's a lot in there. Read it, would you?
Daily Show averages over a million, and can draw over 2 million on special events (post-debate, Kerry, McCain, etc.)
That said, I don't usually watch, but it gets discussed at the office. People ask "Hey, did you see the Daily Show last night?" They talk about it. You don't necessarily have to have people watching you to have influence, if you can get people to talk about you outside of your time slot.
So, at 10c per purchase from /., he'll get....
Nothing. Absolutely nothing.
STUPID. YOU'RE SO STUPID.
Cruithne and 2002AA29 are co-orbital objects, not exactly moons (depending on your definition of moon).
At any rate, the energy required to normalize their orbits into standard elliptical/circular orbits around the Earth (as opposed to Cruithne's 385-year orbit which only happens to include the Earth due to eccentricity in the orbit, or 2002AA29's horseshoe orbit which is even stranger) is extremely high.