While yours is a well thought out comment, from dealing extensively with web site latency for multiple sites, "bleeding edge" is often slower than "simple" or "old".
As others have pointed out, it's the 300kb of javascript from 10 different social widget and ad sites that slow down the page. Most research on this topic today emphasizes client-side latency, as in the code and structure of what your browser downloads and in what sequence. Client side latency generally consumes > 90% of the user visible latency. After all, light and packets can travel half-way around the world in just 60 milliseconds, yet this is talking about penalizing sites taking over 4 seconds to load.
TL; DR; You won't have to upgrade or buy lightning fast hosting. Just don't bloat down your page with dozens of third party js or tens/hundreds of poorly compressed images and you'll be fine!
Hey there,
I'm looking for a car and really wanted a Prius. We test drove on last weekend and I loved it (was ready to put down my deposit). One problem though, my wife (6'4") was too tall to sit in either front seat of the Prius. This wasn't just "Wanting more room". She couldn't sit there at all, without a pretty major contortion of her legs just to get the door shut for a 5 minute test drive.
Here are some real stats: Toyota's happily made the Prius about 300 pounds heavier than the Civic Hybrid, so that it enters the "midsize" category of cars. See, cars are categorized by weight, not size. As it turns out, the Civic is larger in every external dimension (H,W,D) than the Prius, and yes - my wife fits in one just fine.
I actually have no problem with the Prius, but it's funny that you get nearly $1000 more tax incentive with the Prius than the Civic as of Jan 1, 2006, because the Prius compares better to it's "weight class/midsize" than the Civic Hybrid compares to it's "weight class/compact". For safety & size, I'd go with the civic.
One more thing - a well equipped Civic with 6 airbags standard (and I would assume Corolla, but haven't done the research) will get 40mpg highway and cost you about $7k less than the Prius.
"The launch of a WiFi service would move Google away from its core Internet search service and into the competitive world of Internet service providers and telecommunications giants."
It's amazing to me how deep the sense of corporate entitlement there is in terms of keeping the status quo and protecting business models. Instead of seeing Google's WiFi as a threat to the telecom giants - how about seeing the telecom giants as slow, monopoly-driven bohemoths that have done as much as possible to stifle innovation. It's been what, 10 years since I've had DSL the first time and it's still a pain in the rear to get set-up and the bandwidth is still asynch and high latency.
No - I see this as Google "Taking Back" the idea of internet connectivity from the purely greedy telecom companies. The telecoms see the internet as a forced-bundling opportunity. Google might just de-couple the forced-bundling part and actually give away internet access. This does not really threaten the telecoms, as they have complained for years that their government-granted monolopies were not really profitable and that they could not afford the infrastructure. Be gone with them!
Dear/. readers. I'm an FAA certificated private pilot of several years. I work in the aviation industry and have had some interesting experiences with this exact issue.
I do not know that, or pretend to know that operating any RF devices will "crash" an aircraft.
I DO know that even leaving a cell phone on during flight can interfere with avionics and communications. This is from real experience - and it was *very* distracting.
Here's the story: Flying closed traffic touch & goes at Oakland International Airport, my instructor (CFII) and I were both hearing a loud static noise at two places in the pattern. This was pretty darn distracting to say the least. Here we are, doing proficiency drills (landings / pattern / emergency landing without power, etc) and there's a darn buzzer in our ear shortly after takeoff and at midfield. What was it? I had left my cellphone on accidentally and buried deep in my flight bag. It was soo annoying that I asked my instructor to fly the plane while I akwardly tried to twist around the seat of the C172 and find the cell, and only was able to after several painful moments - but it was worth it for how annoying the buzzing was.
Now, this was a Day VFR (visual flight rules) flight under nearly ideal conditions. Most major aviation accidents that occur have some level of human factors that play into the incident. Further, the NTSB establishes a "chain of events" that leads up to the accident - any one of which being broken would likely have prevented the accident.
Let me ask you this. You are cruising at night in IFR conditions (in the clouds, no horizon) 30,000 feet in a commercial aircraft and the pilot loses his artificial horizon. Immediately, the pilot informs the copilot and the copilot starts flying the aircraft on his 'good' instrument. You land safely. This exact scenario was one of the more recent fatal airliner accidents in Asia, except that the pilot was distracted and did not properly give control to the copilot.
Do you want the pilot of your aircraft to be distracted by frequent buzzing in his/her headset? Aircraft these days have the capability of flying and landing themselves. Pilots are largely there for two reasons (IMHO). One of these is to re-assure the public. The other, perhaps more valid, is to deal with emergency situations. Please - don't mess with them, once the autopilot is disabled/off, they're your only chance.
I work at a company with a 30+ year mainframe application that runs exclusively via line mode commands. This software is wrapped by SOAP middleware that I largely wrote or migrated our old legacy binary middleware to. This SOAP middleware is called by Tomcat - our choice of Java Servlet Container serving up dynamic web / transactional content. The application is extremely complex and results of almost any command/query change on a minute-by-minute basis - based on approx 1GB of fresh weather and other data updated asynchronously with over 20 data feeds from worldwide reporting stations.
How do we test this you ask? Break down the problem into: (a) components (b) component integrations (i.e. network/middleware checks)
Automate tests for each and you're at least 80/90% of the way there. I.e. Unit test pieces such as a UI or Middleware, and also make unit tests that verify the connections between components.
If you're unlucky enough to be in a totally mixed-up environment without any seperation between GUI, logic, back-end, etc... often lumped together as MVC, but I prefer just to say "component based" you may have to do some re-architecture to get to a better scriptable setup.
Our automated tests (web environment, mind you) test for:
1. Basic web server & Tomcat / Servlet function. 2. Web/Tomcat Server -> Middleware connection (no actual request) 3. Tomcat->Middleware->Legacy System connection. 4. Tomcat->Middleware->Legacy System operations - i.e. actually do something.
Given the complex and ever changing data we operate with, we can't test everything that only a human eyeball can spot. However, these tests are re-used for live system monitoring, regression testing, and load testing. They also can find many of the "brain dead" issues - such as a total system meltdown or specific function being broken by a code change without requiring a tester to test everything out.
I strongly recommend going for automated testing as much as possible - even if you're only getting at the low hanging fruit. Breaking down the problem into managable chunks w/unit tests can also save serious hassle trying to figure out later why a tester got an error somewhere.
What's next? Can an ISP owned by megacorp X, who also owns a stake in, say, buy.com block me from purchasing from newegg.com?
Can an ISP affiliated with Yahoo block google?
What about my netflix account, can they block netflix in favor of a partnership with block-buster?
If anyone mentions bandwidth, you lose the argument. Why? I play online multiplayer games that use as much or more of it than Vonage does. And I play often ~ 1hr a day, while our Vonage usage is about 5-15min a day on average.
Simply put, the internet connection is a common carrier. Unless they release that term and take responsibility for the content pushed and pulled over their network, they can not censor.
WTF does Rupert Murdoch or Fox have to do with it?
A crappy article about a video game in a UK tabloid, and all of a sudden let's bash the guy who owns the most non-left-biased piece of mainstream US media... Hmmm, a bit sore about the election are we?
Just because you may have a left-bias which leads you to agree with NPR and the UN does not automagically make anything to the right of you bad or bash-worthy.
If you have anything specific to say (i.e. if you know of Murdoch owned stations doing specific things related to *this* story) please - by all means, bring it on. This is like saying: Wow - Britney sucks, and the RIAA ownz Britney, but wait - the RIAA also ownz U2, so U2 sucks too, but only because I don't like them, and Michael Moore told me not to like them, but I can't think for myself so I'll just hate them.
Grow up. If you have a beef with someone or some corporation, spell it out - get a blog or something. Like I wrote: WTF does Fox News have to do with this british tabloid & a pirated video game? NOTHING.
Hi fellow/. readers,
I've been an FAA certified private pilot for a couple of years and read many of the monthly general-aviation magazines/websites/etc...
Just to give some real info about parachutes and small planes.
Myth # 1: Engine Failure ==> Crash.
This is very un-true. Reading usenet forums (rec.aviation.piloting/owning/student) there are a great deal of forced-landings involving full or partial engine failure. From the very beginning of flight training, you are tought to always have a place you can glide safely to. In reality, this is difficult - particularly on takeoff climbing out, but for most of the 'time' portion of any flight it is very doable.
Myth # 2: Personal Parachutes are easy - c'mon, we see them in movies all the time. Fact: it is *not* easy to jump out of a moving plane. I took about 5 hours of aerobatic lessons, and let me tell you - it's tough enough getting into small planes, but try it with a 15lb full-chair-back size parachute stuck to you. It was actually difficult getting in and out on the ground, stopped. Add to that, most airplanes have doors that open like car doors - opening to the back. Any idea what the aerodynamic forces are at, say 100 mph? The aerobatic plane I flew had an emergency full-door release that pulled out the door-hinge pins at the front.
Now, back to the BRS parachutes. These are being put mostly on Cirrus Designs aircraft - very sweet, beautiful planes IMHO. These aircraft are *very* capable, fast, and a bit tougher to fly than your average Cessna 182 (from the reports I've read). Most times an aircraft gets in trouble, it's due to the pilot making a bad decision, not due to engine failure. Bad decisions like: flying into bad weather (IMC), scud running below low overcast, etc... These are the places where BRS was intended to be used:
1. Inadvertant Spins - the Cirrus is highly spin resistant, but it is possible & people have died in Cirrus following a spin.
2. Full instrument failure in IMC (clouds,fog,etc). This could leave the pilot with few ways to save the lives of the people inside.
A last fact: from what I've read, the BRS does not in-fact save insurance companies money. It nearly totals the plane. Think about a house-sized parachute attached to your average family sedan, deployed by rockets at 120mph. The planes are mostly totalled, but the avionics & engine (most expensive parts after the airframe) are likely salvagable.
Re:Without reading... Real Info from a Pilot
on
NYT On Flying Cars
·
· Score: 4, Informative
The parent poster basically makes one point: it will be hard to regulate, so let's just give up. OMG: there'll be licenses and regulations... just... like... a highway!.
You can't fly too low/high - have you ever seen a speed limit, or minimum-speed on roads today?
Airplanes today already are being shipped with BRS systems - ballistic recovery systems - rocket deployed parachutes for safe recovery after losing control / etc... see: Cirrus Aircraft.
To counter the well-intended, but wrong info in the parent poster: they only have to regulate a few licensed carriers and a relatively small number of private pilots. This is completely false... see the AOPA or Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association - of America. It has over 400,000 active, dues-paying members in the US alone, making up one of the largest active lobbies in the US. General Aviation serves america - making the first critical blood and organ transfer transports after 9/11 - see GA Serving America for more info.
As for good medical history / etc... The FAA just approved a new set of certifications called LSA / Light Sport Aircraft, allowing pilots (with certain limitations) to self-certify their health when flying particularly light (under about 1200lbs) aircraft. This is far higher than the current UltraLight limits - getting well into some of the modern composite aircraft built in Europe - that get better fuel efficiency than cars (per seat mile) and are faster than the US certified all metal birds such as Cessna 150s/152s.
All this said, the FAA (A slow, frustrating organization at times) is making the transition to GPS (w/WAAS/LASS) in the next decade as the primary means of instrument / navigation for air transportation.
One goal of this, already being implemented is mode-S transponders that with new FAA radio/radar systems being rolled out will do to ATC what GPS and SatComm did for the military - provide a complete 3D picture of all aircraft in the sky including position, velocity, trends, and modeled based on aircraft capability - the future potential positions of an aircraft. Not to mention the ability to transfer a flight plan / guidance revision to an aircraft over digital radio.
This is part of the FAA's free-flight initiative - a very slow, future-envisioning research project including providing for fully automated 3D navigation for air-taxi services including collision avoidance with non-automated aircraft.
Finally - a pet peeve of pilots, there is no such thing as a pilot's license... just a pilot certificate - certificated not unlike an aircraft... in that the certificate is only valid given certain conditions (recent flight, bi-annual flight reviews, etc...)
As someone who used craigslist when it was a (gasp) email list, and also lived on the same block as the cl headquarters for 3 years in SF, this article is utter nonsense.
The whole point of craigslist is the micro-personal connection of real people, in close physical proxmity, buying & selling stuff. I've known a great many people who've purchased, sold, and gave away: airline vouchers, couches, desks, etc...
Even while living in SF during the dot com boom and bust, I know virtually nobody who ever got a job off of craigslist. Further, nobody in their right mind would use craigslist to find a home to purchase...
Oh - and back to the basics - craigslist expands thru word of mouth. How do you suppose they would charge for any of the garbage this tech-moron suggests? A great feature of cl is that you can include html in your posts - good posters often do, and include images, formatting etc... design resumes often include good css styles, images, and look pretty darn sweet - try that on hotjobs!
So, this guy thinks that without additional cost/strain/staff they're going to just quadruple his totally BS estimate of their revenue?
Why would they want to go public anyhow? With only 14 staff, and no reason to buy-out other companies or invest in serious R&D, does it ever come to mind that a businessperson with a small company making serious $$$ might just want to keep it that way?
Do you ever watch the discovery channel? Ever heard of the X-Planes? There were what, 15+ of them, and none of them could carry 3 people nor carry out a useful 'mission'. It's called research.
The X-Prize is not about building a hypersonic airliner, nor about going to the moon. It's a prize that at this appropriate time in man-machine innovation encouraged some awesome engineers and pioneers to break the old mold of waiting for the government to 'do the big things'.
Don't know about you, but I think 3 minutes of weightlessness in a super-efficient aircraft making sub-orbital flight, done by private individuals is not dead-end. The first (few) that accomplish this feat will likely prove to NASA and the ESA that single gigantic booster rockets are neither efficient nor as re-usable as we were all lead to believe.
I can't believe people would be soo strong to propose fully computer-controlled airplanes, without manual override, while most of our nations metro systems have drivers.
The factors that affect flight (I'm a private pilot pp-asel) are soo diverse and include decision making far more complex than "should I turn here to avoid airspace xyz". In an emergency - say an engine failure, oil leak, etc, pilots *are* allowed to violate any airspace restriction to avoid injury / deaths. Here are the federal regulations that are pertinent:
FAR = "federal aviation regulations" which comprise section 14 of the Federal Law Registry.
FARs part 91 = General Operating and Flight Rules * general (non commercial) aviation falls under part 91.
FAR 91.3b = "In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency".
Far 91.141 restricts flight in the vicinity of the president and president's related parties. It is clearly in part 91, and can be deviated from in an emergency.
My flight instructor had a partial engine failure in a twin engine aircraft during training at Oakland - and dealing with the emergency required flying below a the legal 1000' altitude above populated areas. In fact he flew at 500' in the pattern which is below the "500' from people or property rule". If the plane attempted to climb on a partially failed engine, they would have likely crashed and all (3 aboard) perished.
There are 1000s of anecdotes, but feel free to go over to rec.aviation.piloting or r.a.student to read more. Having computers override pilots is a very bad idea - in the minds of virtually all actual pilots.
The likelyhood of true disasters coming from airplanes that take control from pilots is pretty high in my book. The likelyhood of armed terrorists being able to disable such a system also seems pretty high... ever heard of a wire-cutter? How about a gps jammer?
Final note: GPS is not perfect! I've flown two different C172s with Garmin 430 and 530 equipment, and both misplaced class-B (the only airspace below 18000' requiring a clearance to enter) airspaces by several nautical miles. If such gps ever misplaced a mountaintop, or the plane's position by even a couple of miles, it could forcebly cause a crash under near-ideal conditions.
They said that it's WiFi based... which means (airborn, improved line of site) that it has a range of approx 1000'.
I think you can strongly guess, from looking at the surrounding buildings etc, that the outer rings are approx 100-2000' in diameter (I'm making an honest guess) - and are probably to keep them 'aware' of the limitations on range/control.
These are the same magazines with full color, multi-page reviews of the new 0.025% faster hardware. They are the same magazines that review each micro$oft product and say that the TCO is lower than ever before. Take one look at any of their websites, and you will see:
These magazines are Advertisements
Taking anything from them seriously is like taking a presidential speech to be a serious economic discussion, or taking a realtor's web-site as gospel in the market.
Funny - just went to CNET.com to research my post, and guess what? Over 50% of the page is advertising. The rest is 'reviews' of which 100% have links to affiliate programs to purchase said hard/software and give a kickback to CNET.
They will try hard to sell anything, and get their commission. It's like they are the used car salesman of the internet - only everything is new and they don't look you in the eyes when lying to you.
I can't believe how much the media and the courts let slip by. The CNN article should have been titled Telemarketers Attempt to Defraud Courts with fake job loss numbers and scare tactics.
I don't have a clue how many people the Tele-hacks employ, but I sure know that they never get any business from me. By using this list, I am saving them time - increasing their profits!
2 Million Jobs! You have to be kidding me!
Why can't the media see thru lies like this one, and the RIAA, and simply report that companies are lying in order to survive.
You quoted me wrong - I said that there is a radially sweeping signal at 3600hz. While VOR runs in the VHF band, the navigational information is sent on a 60hz sinewave sent from an antenna rotating at 3600hz. See the following link for a more complete explanation.
Here is the quote:
A VOR (VHF Omni Range) station, usually at an airport, transmits a signal which is FM'ed (Frequency Modulated) with a 60 Hz sine wave. It is broadcast from a directional antenna which is rotating horizontally at 3600 RPM.
Read & think before you post. The only thing you got right in your post was arrogance, and yes - VOR does run in the VHF band.
The problem is in fact that the radio navagation aids 'navaids' operate at low frequencies and use geo-displacement / frequency modulation as part of the navigation method. The most common example, the VOR, or 'very high omnidirectional radial beacon' sends out a radially sweeping signal at 3600hz. This is such a low frequency that it can be affected by non-primary frequencies in small electronic devices. For example: CDMA/TDMA cellular phones, while operating at (at least one of them) 1900Mhz (AFAIK), they have polling frequencies that could be very close to 3600hz.
I would really like it if GPS was the primary navaid, but it is not. GPS was just recently approved (in the last two weeks) for IFR approaches, and until now, it wasn't even legal to conduct a full flight to commercial minimums (I think it's Category III ILS) - making it useless to commercial air carriers. Further, it's going to take the FAA at it's current rate, over a decade to convert the terrestrial navaid approaches and nav plates to include GPS routing and approaches.
Thus - here's just one example, where it's not the routing, and hopefully this will clear up the radio frequency problem... When I take off with my CFI into IFR (clouds, zero vis), I guarantee you that we both turn off our cell phones! (and that's in a 4 seater cessna 172)
Do you want to install our advertisement displaying system that ignores your user input, home page selection, and other settings?
AOL: I hate you.
I will never use your software, unless it happens to be the only broadband in the whole entire world.
Netscape Staff: You suck - if you even exist anymore - seems like 90% of your work is adding on crapware installers for AOL rather than doing good work - you should go work for doubleclick or other add F**ks.
Mozilla peeps: thanks for your awesome browser - still loads faster on my slow work machine than Netscrape.
You are *soo* wrong. I worked 6mo at a startup that purchased 100+ brand spanking new Sun servers and workstations. At least 10% of them were Dead on Arrival, and another 5% failed in the first 3 months.
Please - stop this silly FUD from Sun and big iron manufacturers.
The reality - how many of us have 2-3 extra old PCs sitting in closets because they're slow, but they never broke down? I have 4 PCs and use one of them, but the other 3 still work.
I really could care less about karma, but just realize you're wrong. Enterprise machines cost more often times because they can be easily bundled with redundant hardware/software, but don't fool yourself into believing Sun machines don't fail. Why do you think they have every component in racks? It's not for easy assembly - it's for easy replacement!
I actually read this site just yesterday - He's using far cheaper gear.
10 CRTs (currently my company is selling off surplus for $50 a piece) = $500
TFTs - currently, 17" CRTs are about $400 = $1200
He said that they are mostly cheap-o video cards such as the nVidia GF4MX = $40 each ==> $520
PCs - most are of the 800mhz variety - can be had for $200/piece at an auction. --> $1800
Price Total: $4020.
Now, I don't know where this guy lives, but my Private Pilot Certificate PP-ASEL cost me approx $8000 in the SF-Bay Area.
I love flying - read: LOVE flying - nothing comes close.
However, let this guy have his kicks... if he got deals on the gear, it's only 33% more expensive than your high performance gaming PC setup listed on arstechnica and other hobbyist sites.
At least it's better and far cooler than having neon fans and powered liquid coolant systems overclocking by 10% to get 500,000 fps in quake.
Before you all flame me, please read the whole post.
I think this is close to a reasonable settlement and outcome of the situation.
There, I've said it.
These kids will still be able to go to school, their families will not be put in the poor house, and they will learn a big big lesson.
In addition, I feel it is significantly risky that I no longer will use online file sharing of the 'free' variety. Now that there is a legal option - iTunes Music Store for the Mac, I see the first ray of hope for an alternative.
Please Read: I know that iTunes is not out for Windows, and that the alternative is not yet here for Windows users - however I think the RIAA and related companies will soon get it that what many people want is not simply free music, but instant music.
I am happy to purchase music online and Apple's new service (although I don't have a mac!) is the first to offer a non DRM solution that allows for instant transfers and fair use.
All that said - as much as I dislike the RIAA, and have posted many a post against their kind (and the DMCA), I'm glad that they settled in a manner that will allow these college kids to have decent lives and not be *too* affected/ruined.
When it comes to 4 wheel vehicles, there are a lot of choices to be made. Choosing the right self-locomoting gadget can be difficult. A bad one can bring you boring and uncool status, as well as put a dent in your wallet.
Since I'm a scientist, I will make this review as objective as possible. Where subjective judgements are required - heck, screw it, I'm a scientist damn it - my word is objective!
Colour: Both the Camry and the off road Tamiya RC Car have paint. The Tamiya has customizable paint, as well as cool racing stickers. The Camry is available in XLE two tone with gold trim, although that will set you back much more than a full selection of Tamiya paints. Win goes to the Tamiya for choice, although it doesn't matter if you prefer Camry colors such as Boring-Gray, Boring-Gold, or ugly as heck Blue.
Score: CAM 5, TAM 8
Construction quality: In a double blind test, we placed both the Camry and the Tamiya in a mud filled parking lot after a rain. The Camry got really dirty, but was able to spin around a little bit. It's front-wheel drive prooved to let it get the whole side of the car dirty - but nothing fell off. The Tamiya sank deep in the mud. We didn't think it would do anything, but even while *completely* submerged, it was able to make a mess for over 25 feet around - covering everything else with mud. After this test, the Tamiya made some wierd noises, while the Camry was "smooth and quiet" according to one tester.
Score: CAM 9, TAM 6
Form Factor: The Camry LE v4 has well-shaped controls with a grip-shaped steering wheel. The Tamiya only had a Foam-Circular steering wheel on the Futaba controller. The Camry takes up a whole parking space, while the Tamiya will easily fit in the back of your average family sedan. Clearly, the Tamiya wins here - you can much more easily get it to your local track than a Camry, which would require a flatbed.
Score: CAM 5, TAM 8
LCD Display: Unfortunately, neither of these 'beta' release gadgets had their LCDs installed at press time. We were sent a memo from Tamiya that the next Futaba would have a cool back-lit display. However, after seeing the Toyota Prius, we think the next gen camry will have some really cool options.
Score: CAM 0, TAM 0
Replayability: Nothing beats driving to work in bumper-2-bumper in boredom and frustration. The Camry clearly sucks in this regard. The Tamiya can be used anywhere, anytime, and never gets old. On and Off Road racing is clearly fun, so the win goes to the Tamiya.
Score: CAM -1, TAM 9
Storage: This is the main area where the Camry wins. You can fit 4 1/2 full sized adults, several RC vehicles, and some music players such as an iPod in this baby. We really liked that. However, the Tamiya had some great attachment points for running lights and mini-sound effects generators.
Score: CAM 8, TAM 2
Totals: Work -12, Late for work while boss is out of town Priceless.
Nice Duplicate of Last Weeks Story
on
Google Hacks
·
· Score: -1, Redundant
I have no great authority here, except that I have ran several linux systems, coded simple linux apps, and ran ATI's all-in-wonder (piece of crap) PVR solution for two years.
Every month or so, someone comes up with a newfangled linux PVR and posts it here and on sourceforge.
Last I looked, there were at least 4 seperate projects on linux PVRs. There was also something major wrong with each project!
One project has a cool interface but could not actually record!
One project could record and playback, but not record and playback at the same time!
Yet another project could record and playback, but even the author of the thing reported that the audio and video were badly out of sync.
Now: I don't know if the Ask slashdot question was a troll, or someone hoping to startup a dumb dot bomb that re-sells TV signals, but even a single P-1Ghz with an ATI all in wonder could barely record at broadcast quality - read: It didn't ever fully approximate broadcast quality.
I've got two coworkers who purchased PC PVR solutions, and guess what - all three of us now own: Tivo, Replay, and DishNetwork-PVR systems.
BAH. This is really stupid. Until someone hacks together something that actually works, and doesn't require a PHd in driver hacking, and syncs the audio properly, and has a 1/10^6 chance of working on someone else's build of linux/hardware, then let's not waste time discussing the *neato* applications of linux PVR. It's still a fantasy for private/OSS projects...
Slashdot Mirror
While yours is a well thought out comment, from dealing extensively with web site latency for multiple sites, "bleeding edge" is often slower than "simple" or "old". As others have pointed out, it's the 300kb of javascript from 10 different social widget and ad sites that slow down the page. Most research on this topic today emphasizes client-side latency, as in the code and structure of what your browser downloads and in what sequence. Client side latency generally consumes > 90% of the user visible latency. After all, light and packets can travel half-way around the world in just 60 milliseconds, yet this is talking about penalizing sites taking over 4 seconds to load. TL; DR; You won't have to upgrade or buy lightning fast hosting. Just don't bloat down your page with dozens of third party js or tens/hundreds of poorly compressed images and you'll be fine!
Hey there,
I'm looking for a car and really wanted a Prius. We test drove on last weekend and I loved it (was ready to put down my deposit). One problem though, my wife (6'4") was too tall to sit in either front seat of the Prius. This wasn't just "Wanting more room". She couldn't sit there at all, without a pretty major contortion of her legs just to get the door shut for a 5 minute test drive.
Here are some real stats: Toyota's happily made the Prius about 300 pounds heavier than the Civic Hybrid, so that it enters the "midsize" category of cars. See, cars are categorized by weight, not size. As it turns out, the Civic is larger in every external dimension (H,W,D) than the Prius, and yes - my wife fits in one just fine.
I actually have no problem with the Prius, but it's funny that you get nearly $1000 more tax incentive with the Prius than the Civic as of Jan 1, 2006, because the Prius compares better to it's "weight class/midsize" than the Civic Hybrid compares to it's "weight class/compact". For safety & size, I'd go with the civic.
One more thing - a well equipped Civic with 6 airbags standard (and I would assume Corolla, but haven't done the research) will get 40mpg highway and cost you about $7k less than the Prius.
Here's a paragraph from the Reuters article:
"The launch of a WiFi service would move Google away from its core Internet search service and into the competitive world of Internet service providers and telecommunications giants."
It's amazing to me how deep the sense of corporate entitlement there is in terms of keeping the status quo and protecting business models. Instead of seeing Google's WiFi as a threat to the telecom giants - how about seeing the telecom giants as slow, monopoly-driven bohemoths that have done as much as possible to stifle innovation. It's been what, 10 years since I've had DSL the first time and it's still a pain in the rear to get set-up and the bandwidth is still asynch and high latency.
No - I see this as Google "Taking Back" the idea of internet connectivity from the purely greedy telecom companies. The telecoms see the internet as a forced-bundling opportunity. Google might just de-couple the forced-bundling part and actually give away internet access. This does not really threaten the telecoms, as they have complained for years that their government-granted monolopies were not really profitable and that they could not afford the infrastructure. Be gone with them!
Dear /. readers.
I'm an FAA certificated private pilot of several years. I work in the aviation industry and have had some interesting experiences with this exact issue.
I do not know that, or pretend to know that operating any RF devices will "crash" an aircraft.
I DO know that even leaving a cell phone on during flight can interfere with avionics and communications. This is from real experience - and it was *very* distracting.
Here's the story: Flying closed traffic touch & goes at Oakland International Airport, my instructor (CFII) and I were both hearing a loud static noise at two places in the pattern. This was pretty darn distracting to say the least. Here we are, doing proficiency drills (landings / pattern / emergency landing without power, etc) and there's a darn buzzer in our ear shortly after takeoff and at midfield. What was it? I had left my cellphone on accidentally and buried deep in my flight bag. It was soo annoying that I asked my instructor to fly the plane while I akwardly tried to twist around the seat of the C172 and find the cell, and only was able to after several painful moments - but it was worth it for how annoying the buzzing was.
Now, this was a Day VFR (visual flight rules) flight under nearly ideal conditions. Most major aviation accidents that occur have some level of human factors that play into the incident. Further, the NTSB establishes a "chain of events" that leads up to the accident - any one of which being broken would likely have prevented the accident.
Let me ask you this. You are cruising at night in IFR conditions (in the clouds, no horizon) 30,000 feet in a commercial aircraft and the pilot loses his artificial horizon. Immediately, the pilot informs the copilot and the copilot starts flying the aircraft on his 'good' instrument. You land safely. This exact scenario was one of the more recent fatal airliner accidents in Asia, except that the pilot was distracted and did not properly give control to the copilot.
Do you want the pilot of your aircraft to be distracted by frequent buzzing in his/her headset? Aircraft these days have the capability of flying and landing themselves. Pilots are largely there for two reasons (IMHO). One of these is to re-assure the public. The other, perhaps more valid, is to deal with emergency situations. Please - don't mess with them, once the autopilot is disabled/off, they're your only chance.
I work at a company with a 30+ year mainframe application that runs exclusively via line mode commands. This software is wrapped by SOAP middleware that I largely wrote or migrated our old legacy binary middleware to. This SOAP middleware is called by Tomcat - our choice of Java Servlet Container serving up dynamic web / transactional content. The application is extremely complex and results of almost any command/query change on a minute-by-minute basis - based on approx 1GB of fresh weather and other data updated asynchronously with over 20 data feeds from worldwide reporting stations.
How do we test this you ask?
Break down the problem into:
(a) components
(b) component integrations (i.e. network/middleware checks)
Automate tests for each and you're at least 80/90% of the way there. I.e. Unit test pieces such as a UI or Middleware, and also make unit tests that verify the connections between components.
If you're unlucky enough to be in a totally mixed-up environment without any seperation between GUI, logic, back-end, etc... often lumped together as MVC, but I prefer just to say "component based" you may have to do some re-architecture to get to a better scriptable setup.
Our automated tests (web environment, mind you) test for:
1. Basic web server & Tomcat / Servlet function.
2. Web/Tomcat Server -> Middleware connection (no actual request)
3. Tomcat->Middleware->Legacy System connection.
4. Tomcat->Middleware->Legacy System operations - i.e. actually do something.
Given the complex and ever changing data we operate with, we can't test everything that only a human eyeball can spot. However, these tests are re-used for live system monitoring, regression testing, and load testing. They also can find many of the "brain dead" issues - such as a total system meltdown or specific function being broken by a code change without requiring a tester to test everything out.
I strongly recommend going for automated testing as much as possible - even if you're only getting at the low hanging fruit. Breaking down the problem into managable chunks w/unit tests can also save serious hassle trying to figure out later why a tester got an error somewhere.
Exactly.
What's next? Can an ISP owned by megacorp X, who also owns a stake in, say, buy.com block me from purchasing from newegg.com?
Can an ISP affiliated with Yahoo block google?
What about my netflix account, can they block netflix in favor of a partnership with block-buster?
If anyone mentions bandwidth, you lose the argument. Why? I play online multiplayer games that use as much or more of it than Vonage does. And I play often ~ 1hr a day, while our Vonage usage is about 5-15min a day on average.
Simply put, the internet connection is a common carrier. Unless they release that term and take responsibility for the content pushed and pulled over their network, they can not censor.
WTF does Rupert Murdoch or Fox have to do with it?
A crappy article about a video game in a UK tabloid, and all of a sudden let's bash the guy who owns the most non-left-biased piece of mainstream US media... Hmmm, a bit sore about the election are we?
Just because you may have a left-bias which leads you to agree with NPR and the UN does not automagically make anything to the right of you bad or bash-worthy.
If you have anything specific to say (i.e. if you know of Murdoch owned stations doing specific things related to *this* story) please - by all means, bring it on. This is like saying: Wow - Britney sucks, and the RIAA ownz Britney, but wait - the RIAA also ownz U2, so U2 sucks too, but only because I don't like them, and Michael Moore told me not to like them, but I can't think for myself so I'll just hate them.
Grow up. If you have a beef with someone or some corporation, spell it out - get a blog or something. Like I wrote: WTF does Fox News have to do with this british tabloid & a pirated video game? NOTHING.
Hi fellow /. readers,
I've been an FAA certified private pilot for a couple of years and read many of the monthly general-aviation magazines/websites/etc...
Just to give some real info about parachutes and small planes.
Myth # 1: Engine Failure ==> Crash.
This is very un-true. Reading usenet forums (rec.aviation.piloting/owning/student) there are a great deal of forced-landings involving full or partial engine failure. From the very beginning of flight training, you are tought to always have a place you can glide safely to. In reality, this is difficult - particularly on takeoff climbing out, but for most of the 'time' portion of any flight it is very doable.
Myth # 2: Personal Parachutes are easy - c'mon, we see them in movies all the time. Fact: it is *not* easy to jump out of a moving plane. I took about 5 hours of aerobatic lessons, and let me tell you - it's tough enough getting into small planes, but try it with a 15lb full-chair-back size parachute stuck to you. It was actually difficult getting in and out on the ground, stopped. Add to that, most airplanes have doors that open like car doors - opening to the back. Any idea what the aerodynamic forces are at, say 100 mph? The aerobatic plane I flew had an emergency full-door release that pulled out the door-hinge pins at the front.
Now, back to the BRS parachutes. These are being put mostly on Cirrus Designs aircraft - very sweet, beautiful planes IMHO. These aircraft are *very* capable, fast, and a bit tougher to fly than your average Cessna 182 (from the reports I've read). Most times an aircraft gets in trouble, it's due to the pilot making a bad decision, not due to engine failure. Bad decisions like: flying into bad weather (IMC), scud running below low overcast, etc... These are the places where BRS was intended to be used:
1. Inadvertant Spins - the Cirrus is highly spin resistant, but it is possible & people have died in Cirrus following a spin.
2. Full instrument failure in IMC (clouds,fog,etc). This could leave the pilot with few ways to save the lives of the people inside.
A last fact: from what I've read, the BRS does not in-fact save insurance companies money. It nearly totals the plane. Think about a house-sized parachute attached to your average family sedan, deployed by rockets at 120mph. The planes are mostly totalled, but the avionics & engine (most expensive parts after the airframe) are likely salvagable.
The parent poster basically makes one point: it will be hard to regulate, so let's just give up. OMG: there'll be licenses and regulations... just... like... a highway!.
You can't fly too low/high - have you ever seen a speed limit, or minimum-speed on roads today?
Airplanes today already are being shipped with BRS systems - ballistic recovery systems - rocket deployed parachutes for safe recovery after losing control / etc... see: Cirrus Aircraft.
To counter the well-intended, but wrong info in the parent poster: they only have to regulate a few licensed carriers and a relatively small number of private pilots. This is completely false... see the AOPA or Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association - of America. It has over 400,000 active, dues-paying members in the US alone, making up one of the largest active lobbies in the US. General Aviation serves america - making the first critical blood and organ transfer transports after 9/11 - see GA Serving America for more info.
As for good medical history / etc... The FAA just approved a new set of certifications called LSA / Light Sport Aircraft, allowing pilots (with certain limitations) to self-certify their health when flying particularly light (under about 1200lbs) aircraft. This is far higher than the current UltraLight limits - getting well into some of the modern composite aircraft built in Europe - that get better fuel efficiency than cars (per seat mile) and are faster than the US certified all metal birds such as Cessna 150s/152s.
All this said, the FAA (A slow, frustrating organization at times) is making the transition to GPS (w/WAAS/LASS) in the next decade as the primary means of instrument / navigation for air transportation.
One goal of this, already being implemented is mode-S transponders that with new FAA radio/radar systems being rolled out will do to ATC what GPS and SatComm did for the military - provide a complete 3D picture of all aircraft in the sky including position, velocity, trends, and modeled based on aircraft capability - the future potential positions of an aircraft. Not to mention the ability to transfer a flight plan / guidance revision to an aircraft over digital radio.
This is part of the FAA's free-flight initiative - a very slow, future-envisioning research project including providing for fully automated 3D navigation for air-taxi services including collision avoidance with non-automated aircraft.
Finally - a pet peeve of pilots, there is no such thing as a pilot's license... just a pilot certificate - certificated not unlike an aircraft... in that the certificate is only valid given certain conditions (recent flight, bi-annual flight reviews, etc...)
As someone who used craigslist when it was a (gasp) email list, and also lived on the same block as the cl headquarters for 3 years in SF, this article is utter nonsense.
The whole point of craigslist is the micro-personal connection of real people, in close physical proxmity, buying & selling stuff. I've known a great many people who've purchased, sold, and gave away: airline vouchers, couches, desks, etc...
Even while living in SF during the dot com boom and bust, I know virtually nobody who ever got a job off of craigslist. Further, nobody in their right mind would use craigslist to find a home to purchase...
Oh - and back to the basics - craigslist expands thru word of mouth. How do you suppose they would charge for any of the garbage this tech-moron suggests? A great feature of cl is that you can include html in your posts - good posters often do, and include images, formatting etc... design resumes often include good css styles, images, and look pretty darn sweet - try that on hotjobs!
So, this guy thinks that without additional cost/strain/staff they're going to just quadruple his totally BS estimate of their revenue?
Why would they want to go public anyhow? With only 14 staff, and no reason to buy-out other companies or invest in serious R&D, does it ever come to mind that a businessperson with a small company making serious $$$ might just want to keep it that way?
Dude - this is a pretty darn lame comment.
Do you ever watch the discovery channel? Ever heard of the X-Planes? There were what, 15+ of them, and none of them could carry 3 people nor carry out a useful 'mission'. It's called research.
The X-Prize is not about building a hypersonic airliner, nor about going to the moon. It's a prize that at this appropriate time in man-machine innovation encouraged some awesome engineers and pioneers to break the old mold of waiting for the government to 'do the big things'.
Don't know about you, but I think 3 minutes of weightlessness in a super-efficient aircraft making sub-orbital flight, done by private individuals is not dead-end. The first (few) that accomplish this feat will likely prove to NASA and the ESA that single gigantic booster rockets are neither efficient nor as re-usable as we were all lead to believe.
Rock on Scaled Composits!
I can't believe people would be soo strong to propose fully computer-controlled airplanes, without manual override, while most of our nations metro systems have drivers.
The factors that affect flight (I'm a private pilot pp-asel) are soo diverse and include decision making far more complex than "should I turn here to avoid airspace xyz". In an emergency - say an engine failure, oil leak, etc, pilots *are* allowed to violate any airspace restriction to avoid injury / deaths. Here are the federal regulations that are pertinent:
FAR = "federal aviation regulations" which comprise section 14 of the Federal Law Registry.
FARs part 91 = General Operating and Flight Rules
* general (non commercial) aviation falls under part 91.
FAR 91.3b = "In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency".
Far 91.141 restricts flight in the vicinity of the president and president's related parties. It is clearly in part 91, and can be deviated from in an emergency.
My flight instructor had a partial engine failure in a twin engine aircraft during training at Oakland - and dealing with the emergency required flying below a the legal 1000' altitude above populated areas. In fact he flew at 500' in the pattern which is below the "500' from people or property rule". If the plane attempted to climb on a partially failed engine, they would have likely crashed and all (3 aboard) perished.
There are 1000s of anecdotes, but feel free to go over to rec.aviation.piloting or r.a.student to read more. Having computers override pilots is a very bad idea - in the minds of virtually all actual pilots.
The likelyhood of true disasters coming from airplanes that take control from pilots is pretty high in my book. The likelyhood of armed terrorists being able to disable such a system also seems pretty high... ever heard of a wire-cutter? How about a gps jammer?
Final note: GPS is not perfect! I've flown two different C172s with Garmin 430 and 530 equipment, and both misplaced class-B (the only airspace below 18000' requiring a clearance to enter) airspaces by several nautical miles. If such gps ever misplaced a mountaintop, or the plane's position by even a couple of miles, it could forcebly cause a crash under near-ideal conditions.
Anyone ever think before posting?
They said that it's WiFi based... which means (airborn, improved line of site) that it has a range of approx 1000'.
I think you can strongly guess, from looking at the surrounding buildings etc, that the outer rings are approx 100-2000' in diameter (I'm making an honest guess) - and are probably to keep them 'aware' of the limitations on range/control.
That's about all the article had to say:
Tests by PC World, PC Magazine and CNET show
These are the same magazines with full color, multi-page reviews of the new 0.025% faster hardware. They are the same magazines that review each micro$oft product and say that the TCO is lower than ever before. Take one look at any of their websites, and you will see:
These magazines are Advertisements
Taking anything from them seriously is like taking a presidential speech to be a serious economic discussion, or taking a realtor's web-site as gospel in the market.
Funny - just went to CNET.com to research my post, and guess what? Over 50% of the page is advertising. The rest is 'reviews' of which 100% have links to affiliate programs to purchase said hard/software and give a kickback to CNET.
They will try hard to sell anything, and get their commission. It's like they are the used car salesman of the internet - only everything is new and they don't look you in the eyes when lying to you.
I can't believe how much the media and the courts let slip by. The CNN article should have been titled Telemarketers Attempt to Defraud Courts with fake job loss numbers and scare tactics.
I don't have a clue how many people the Tele-hacks employ, but I sure know that they never get any business from me. By using this list, I am saving them time - increasing their profits!
2 Million Jobs! You have to be kidding me!
Why can't the media see thru lies like this one, and the RIAA, and simply report that companies are lying in order to survive.
Your ignorance is annoying.
You quoted me wrong - I said that there is a radially sweeping signal at 3600hz. While VOR runs in the VHF band, the navigational information is sent on a 60hz sinewave sent from an antenna rotating at 3600hz. See the following link for a more complete explanation.
Here is the quote:
A VOR (VHF Omni Range) station, usually at an airport, transmits a signal which is FM'ed (Frequency Modulated) with a 60 Hz sine wave. It is broadcast from a directional antenna which is rotating horizontally at 3600 RPM.
Read & think before you post. The only thing you got right in your post was arrogance, and yes - VOR does run in the VHF band.
The problem is (mainly) not due to wiring.
The problem is in fact that the radio navagation aids 'navaids' operate at low frequencies and use geo-displacement / frequency modulation as part of the navigation method. The most common example, the VOR, or 'very high omnidirectional radial beacon' sends out a radially sweeping signal at 3600hz. This is such a low frequency that it can be affected by non-primary frequencies in small electronic devices. For example: CDMA/TDMA cellular phones, while operating at (at least one of them) 1900Mhz (AFAIK), they have polling frequencies that could be very close to 3600hz.
I would really like it if GPS was the primary navaid, but it is not. GPS was just recently approved (in the last two weeks) for IFR approaches, and until now, it wasn't even legal to conduct a full flight to commercial minimums (I think it's Category III ILS) - making it useless to commercial air carriers. Further, it's going to take the FAA at it's current rate, over a decade to convert the terrestrial navaid approaches and nav plates to include GPS routing and approaches.
Thus - here's just one example, where it's not the routing, and hopefully this will clear up the radio frequency problem... When I take off with my CFI into IFR (clouds, zero vis), I guarantee you that we both turn off our cell phones! (and that's in a 4 seater cessna 172)
Those Damn Motha-F**kers.
I'm seriously pissed. They should have said:
Do you want to install our advertisement displaying system that ignores your user input, home page selection, and other settings?
AOL: I hate you.
I will never use your software, unless it happens to be the only broadband in the whole entire world.
Netscape Staff: You suck - if you even exist anymore - seems like 90% of your work is adding on crapware installers for AOL rather than doing good work - you should go work for doubleclick or other add F**ks.
Mozilla peeps: thanks for your awesome browser - still loads faster on my slow work machine than Netscrape.
There. Done.
You are *soo* wrong. I worked 6mo at a startup that purchased 100+ brand spanking new Sun servers and workstations. At least 10% of them were Dead on Arrival, and another 5% failed in the first 3 months.
Please - stop this silly FUD from Sun and big iron manufacturers.
The reality - how many of us have 2-3 extra old PCs sitting in closets because they're slow, but they never broke down? I have 4 PCs and use one of them, but the other 3 still work.
I really could care less about karma, but just realize you're wrong. Enterprise machines cost more often times because they can be easily bundled with redundant hardware/software, but don't fool yourself into believing Sun machines don't fail. Why do you think they have every component in racks? It's not for easy assembly - it's for easy replacement!
hey Anonymous Coward, but you *are* a TROLL.
1. Most auction computers come with the operating system.
2. Do you really think someone went out and *purchased* 6 new licenses to Win98?
3. Ok Ok - I guess I just took the TROLL BAIT. Crawl back in your hole.
I actually read this site just yesterday - He's using far cheaper gear.
10 CRTs (currently my company is selling off surplus for $50 a piece) = $500
TFTs - currently, 17" CRTs are about $400 = $1200 He said that they are mostly cheap-o video cards such as the nVidia GF4MX = $40 each ==> $520
PCs - most are of the 800mhz variety - can be had for $200/piece at an auction. --> $1800
Price Total: $4020.
Now, I don't know where this guy lives, but my Private Pilot Certificate PP-ASEL cost me approx $8000 in the SF-Bay Area.
I love flying - read: LOVE flying - nothing comes close.
However, let this guy have his kicks... if he got deals on the gear, it's only 33% more expensive than your high performance gaming PC setup listed on arstechnica and other hobbyist sites.
At least it's better and far cooler than having neon fans and powered liquid coolant systems overclocking by 10% to get 500,000 fps in quake.
Before you all flame me, please read the whole post.
I think this is close to a reasonable settlement and outcome of the situation.
There, I've said it.
These kids will still be able to go to school, their families will not be put in the poor house, and they will learn a big big lesson.
In addition, I feel it is significantly risky that I no longer will use online file sharing of the 'free' variety. Now that there is a legal option - iTunes Music Store for the Mac, I see the first ray of hope for an alternative.
Please Read: I know that iTunes is not out for Windows, and that the alternative is not yet here for Windows users - however I think the RIAA and related companies will soon get it that what many people want is not simply free music, but instant music.
I am happy to purchase music online and Apple's new service (although I don't have a mac!) is the first to offer a non DRM solution that allows for instant transfers and fair use.
All that said - as much as I dislike the RIAA, and have posted many a post against their kind (and the DMCA), I'm glad that they settled in a manner that will allow these college kids to have decent lives and not be *too* affected/ruined.
When it comes to 4 wheel vehicles, there are a lot of choices to be made. Choosing the right self-locomoting gadget can be difficult. A bad one can bring you boring and uncool status, as well as put a dent in your wallet.
Since I'm a scientist, I will make this review as objective as possible. Where subjective judgements are required - heck, screw it, I'm a scientist damn it - my word is objective!
Colour: Both the Camry and the off road Tamiya RC Car have paint. The Tamiya has customizable paint, as well as cool racing stickers. The Camry is available in XLE two tone with gold trim, although that will set you back much more than a full selection of Tamiya paints. Win goes to the Tamiya for choice, although it doesn't matter if you prefer Camry colors such as Boring-Gray, Boring-Gold, or ugly as heck Blue.
Score: CAM 5, TAM 8
Construction quality: In a double blind test, we placed both the Camry and the Tamiya in a mud filled parking lot after a rain. The Camry got really dirty, but was able to spin around a little bit. It's front-wheel drive prooved to let it get the whole side of the car dirty - but nothing fell off. The Tamiya sank deep in the mud. We didn't think it would do anything, but even while *completely* submerged, it was able to make a mess for over 25 feet around - covering everything else with mud. After this test, the Tamiya made some wierd noises, while the Camry was "smooth and quiet" according to one tester.
Score: CAM 9, TAM 6
Form Factor: The Camry LE v4 has well-shaped controls with a grip-shaped steering wheel. The Tamiya only had a Foam-Circular steering wheel on the Futaba controller. The Camry takes up a whole parking space, while the Tamiya will easily fit in the back of your average family sedan. Clearly, the Tamiya wins here - you can much more easily get it to your local track than a Camry, which would require a flatbed.
Score: CAM 5, TAM 8
LCD Display: Unfortunately, neither of these 'beta' release gadgets had their LCDs installed at press time. We were sent a memo from Tamiya that the next Futaba would have a cool back-lit display. However, after seeing the Toyota Prius, we think the next gen camry will have some really cool options.
Score: CAM 0, TAM 0
Replayability: Nothing beats driving to work in bumper-2-bumper in boredom and frustration. The Camry clearly sucks in this regard. The Tamiya can be used anywhere, anytime, and never gets old. On and Off Road racing is clearly fun, so the win goes to the Tamiya.
Score: CAM -1, TAM 9
Storage: This is the main area where the Camry wins. You can fit 4 1/2 full sized adults, several RC vehicles, and some music players such as an iPod in this baby. We really liked that. However, the Tamiya had some great attachment points for running lights and mini-sound effects generators.
Score: CAM 8, TAM 2
Totals: Work -12, Late for work while boss is out of town Priceless.
Link Here for last weeks story
Uh - anyone who posts new stories ever read the old (err - 1 week old) stories????
I have no great authority here, except that I have ran several linux systems, coded simple linux apps, and ran ATI's all-in-wonder (piece of crap) PVR solution for two years.
Every month or so, someone comes up with a newfangled linux PVR and posts it here and on sourceforge.
Last I looked, there were at least 4 seperate projects on linux PVRs. There was also something major wrong with each project!
One project has a cool interface but could not actually record!
One project could record and playback, but not record and playback at the same time!
Yet another project could record and playback, but even the author of the thing reported that the audio and video were badly out of sync.
Now: I don't know if the Ask slashdot question was a troll, or someone hoping to startup a dumb dot bomb that re-sells TV signals, but even a single P-1Ghz with an ATI all in wonder could barely record at broadcast quality - read: It didn't ever fully approximate broadcast quality.
I've got two coworkers who purchased PC PVR solutions, and guess what - all three of us now own: Tivo, Replay, and DishNetwork-PVR systems.
BAH. This is really stupid. Until someone hacks together something that actually works, and doesn't require a PHd in driver hacking, and syncs the audio properly, and has a 1/10^6 chance of working on someone else's build of linux/hardware, then let's not waste time discussing the *neato* applications of linux PVR. It's still a fantasy for private/OSS projects...