why settle for pizza tips? fuck that - if you can swallow your pride and deliver pizza, you could just as easily swallow someone else's pride and do gay porn. it pays ~$300 a scene. come on, for $300, you'd take a shot in the jaw, right?
> I wish they'd stop trying to bring Cryslers > over to Europe too, it's just embarrassing > when they sell 3.
in case you're implying that the problem is american design philosophy - it's not the manufacturers, it's mostly the consumers. for some reason, there are some americans who like large, ungainly vehicles with brutish styling and uneccessary horsepower. it only makes sense that local mfgs follow suit.
but there are just as many who buy japanese and european makes.
in europe (as you should know) american manufacturers release completely different models becuase the market is totally different. ever seen a german ford taurus wagon?
if the manufacturer could dictate to the market, then surely (german-owned) chrysler would be more successful with their stock models.
that being said, there are plenty of people in europe who like ungainly, brutish american cars. there is a large, loyal chrysler-jeep following in europe.
> That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. And > who is giving out mod points on this thread, > anyway? The article is about CPU development, > for chrissake.
typo. they should hold off UNTIL after unocal...
i agree, the mods are off as usual, this is offtopic. it doesn't matter, mod points don't mean much, especially when they're so obviously misallocated. (at least to me, i browse at -1).
i hope you're right and afghanistan does benefit someday, but saying it's "win-win" - that's like saying what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. is it ethical for me to dust someone proper until he cries and then tell him that it's win-win because he gets insurance money AND i made him my bitch?
two years isn't really a long time - they've been pitching the pipeline for over 5 years. and like i said, the location of the pipeline doesn't make a huge difference - pipelines in that region would have to span several countries - the point is that the pipelines are coming sooner than later (when Russia or China would have eventually financed them) because the US has an established presence in the region... and the US has such a presence in the wake of the invasion and subsequent occupation. That's why people smell an ulterior motive, and I think common sense dictates that since most of the current administration is connected to oil and energy interests, it doesn't take a conspiracy nut to smell an ulterior motive.
right on. currently, in the real world, if there is no procedure then things are only done if they are "business critical." most suits think that security events are unlikely, so that means security is low-prio. Most IT depts since the tech bubble popped are no longer autonomous. They are low on cash, low on available man-hours, and tied into caring more about the company's core business in terms of cash out, and risk management be damned. with an SOP, the cost and effort are easier to nail down, it's a slightly easier sell, and any sysadmin worth his salt will at least try to sneak some of it into the day-to-day.
another thing - the idea that uniform SOP means that things will be easier to hack is pure bullshit - what would anyone recommend to the unwashed vulnerable? Maybe it would sound like this:
- run only necessary services - audit and change your passwords - follow security news and patch accordingly - use virus protection - consider an IDS etc.
sounds a hell of a lot like best practices / standard procedure to me. and NONE of that shit makes it "easier to hack." sheesh.
a trans-afghan pipeline has been encouraged by the us for years preceding the latest invasion of the country. it may never be built, but it is still being pushed by the US. There has been news trickling in fairly steadily in the past two months about this. eg from times of india jan 12
the kazakhs HAVE a good deal of oil/gas - it needs to get south and west. maybe you're referring to the BTC pipeline project that replaced the first trans-afghan pipeline plan.
the idea put forth by the "conspiracy nuts" is that the US had an interest in occupying the region because their presence means they can fund and participate in the installation of new export infrastructure (like the BTC, in which US-based Unocal is involved). The war in Afghanistan meant bases in neighboring countries like Uzbekistan, Pakistan, and Kyrgyzstan, which allows for a permanent regional presence.
it doesn't really matter where the pipeline runs -the US couldn't have participated as easily if it hadn't established a presence.
maybe the conspiracy nuts should hold off on the apologies after unocal donates a portion of their profits to the poverty and war-stricken afghan people, or towards the all-too-modest $160 million reconstruction plan. (To put this into perspective: this doesn't even approach the size of the defecits some of the US' state budgets run).
- the qualia problem (the crux of the mind-brain problem)
what i find interesting is the idea that what we call is a feature of all systems, and that qualia constitute the condition of being a system - and furthermore, that the reason other systems seem to have varying degrees of sentience has more to do with scale, perspective and apparent similarity than with some ill-defined threshold of consciousness.
even if they did inform them, at what point does it become OK to exploit something that is obviously not meant to be public knowledge?
i'm no democrat, but if the allegation is true, then the repubs done fucked up and someone should drop the hammer on them.
if we don't insist on punishment for political misdeeds, regardless of their party affiliations, then crooks will continue to reign in positions of power. fuck. that. root this shit out.
i was all for the impeachment of that sorry-ass intern fucker clinton and i sure as hell hope some serious investigations are made here too.
not everyone on/. adheres to that juvenile interpretation of the hacker ethos.
besides, this isn't the same. if you correctly interpret the 2600 definition of hacking, the GOP folks should have disclosed the security vulnerability, not exploited it for their own benefit.
well, thanks for trying to clarify. look at the whole thread - i'm not arguing that 4WD provides superior handling in most conditions, but i am saying that in snow and ice, 4WD provides no significant control/safety advantage.
my physics IS rusty, and maybe I missed your point. but isn't your equation ignoring the lateral component of the force in a turn which slides the tail out? the torque on the fixed back wheels is only applied in the direction of the driveline - a slide would begin if this lateral inertial force exceeded the opposing lateral frictional force. since there is little lateral torque, the vehicle fishtails. and since the coefficient of friction is so low on snow and ice, the force required is much lower.
However, in a 4wd, each of the four drive wheels gets only 50 ft. lbs of torque. Because of this, you need less friction in order to maintain traction.
but you need SOME friction to maintain steering traction, and in snow you have close to no steering friction. so the benefits 4WD enjoys on a more grippy surface are minimized to be negligible.
Most high performance race cars are All Wheel Drive for (you guessed it!) better traction and handling!
F1 and indy cars are 2WD, but I agree they might benefit from 4WD. Rally cars are mostly 4WD.
> However, in a 4wd, each of the four drive > wheels gets only 50 ft. lbs of torque. Because > of this, you need less friction in order to > maintain traction.
this assumes the conditions allow you to turn torque into greater traction. the torque can't be applied to the road if friction is reduced. good luck trying to hug curves in the snow in a 4wd explorer without cables. you'd have the same result as if you tried to hug a corner with a FWD.
just so you don't think i'm a completely didactic asshole (i am tho) and i don't think my sense of physics is too far off, i tried to find something to corroborate what i was spewing. see this guy's site. seems fairly unbiased, and it says basically that once moving, 4wd provides no safety advantage because it provides no additional steering traction, which is what i was saying.
> The reason for this is most of the time > traction is not zero, as you say.
the point is that in a no-traction situation (e.g. a slideout or a fishtail) rear wheels won't be able to grab any better than front wheels. ignoring the presence of chains - if your rear wheels lose traction, you will slide whether or not they are spinning. on a flat road, it's just as easy to do a 360 in a 4WD as in a 2WD.
simply better than two. At least, that's my experience.
if i had an explanation of HOW I would be inclined to believe this.
Like most tools, don't hate the tool, hate the person who missuses it
you can't judge and classify all SUV owners. creating a list of appropriate uses is not a solution.
better would be to compensate for the possibility of misuse - perhaps by modifying the testing or licensing requirements. using an SUV as a status symbol doesn't automatically qualify as misuse.
Slashdot Mirror
why settle for pizza tips? fuck that - if you can swallow your pride and deliver pizza, you could just as easily swallow someone else's pride and do gay porn. it pays ~$300 a scene. come on, for $300, you'd take a shot in the jaw, right?
the tooth fairy is real, and there's no accounting for taste or spelling.
> I wish they'd stop trying to bring Cryslers
> over to Europe too, it's just embarrassing
> when they sell 3.
in case you're implying that the problem is american design philosophy - it's not the manufacturers, it's mostly the consumers. for some reason, there are some americans who like large, ungainly vehicles with brutish styling and uneccessary horsepower. it only makes sense that local mfgs follow suit.
but there are just as many who buy japanese and european makes.
in europe (as you should know) american manufacturers release completely different models becuase the market is totally different. ever seen a german ford taurus wagon?
if the manufacturer could dictate to the market, then surely (german-owned) chrysler would be more successful with their stock models.
that being said, there are plenty of people in europe who like ungainly, brutish american cars. there is a large, loyal chrysler-jeep following in europe.
wasn't edsel technically a ford sub-brand, and not a single model? kinda erodes the credibility of the ranker(s).
yeah, but they still drive on the wrong side of the road.
i don't know what's funnier - that the server was sealed behind drywall Poe style or that they needed Novell's help to trace an ethernet cable.
oh yeah? then why do they always blow up when they nose dive off a cliff in james bond movies? ;)
close enough.
water would boil on mars given the pressure and daily temperatures.
> That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. And > who is giving out mod points on this thread,
> anyway? The article is about CPU development,
> for chrissake.
typo. they should hold off UNTIL after unocal...
i agree, the mods are off as usual, this is offtopic. it doesn't matter, mod points don't mean much, especially when they're so obviously misallocated. (at least to me, i browse at -1).
i hope you're right and afghanistan does benefit someday, but saying it's "win-win" - that's like saying what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. is it ethical for me to dust someone proper until he cries and then tell him that it's win-win because he gets insurance money AND i made him my bitch?
two years isn't really a long time - they've been pitching the pipeline for over 5 years. and like i said, the location of the pipeline doesn't make a huge difference - pipelines in that region would have to span several countries - the point is that the pipelines are coming sooner than later (when Russia or China would have eventually financed them) because the US has an established presence in the region... and the US has such a presence in the wake of the invasion and subsequent occupation. That's why people smell an ulterior motive, and I think common sense dictates that since most of the current administration is connected to oil and energy interests, it doesn't take a conspiracy nut to smell an ulterior motive.
right on. currently, in the real world, if there is no procedure then things are only done if they are "business critical." most suits think that security events are unlikely, so that means security is low-prio. Most IT depts since the tech bubble popped are no longer autonomous. They are low on cash, low on available man-hours, and tied into caring more about the company's core business in terms of cash out, and risk management be damned. with an SOP, the cost and effort are easier to nail down, it's a slightly easier sell, and any sysadmin worth his salt will at least try to sneak some of it into the day-to-day.
another thing - the idea that uniform SOP means that things will be easier to hack is pure bullshit - what would anyone recommend to the unwashed vulnerable? Maybe it would sound like this:
- run only necessary services
- audit and change your passwords
- follow security news and patch accordingly
- use virus protection
- consider an IDS
etc.
sounds a hell of a lot like best practices / standard procedure to me. and NONE of that shit makes it "easier to hack." sheesh.
it's still on the agenda.
a trans-afghan pipeline has been encouraged by the us for years preceding the latest invasion of the country. it may never be built, but it is still being pushed by the US. There has been news trickling in fairly steadily in the past two months about this. eg from times of india jan 12
the kazakhs HAVE a good deal of oil/gas - it needs to get south and west. maybe you're referring to the BTC pipeline project that replaced the first trans-afghan pipeline plan.
the idea put forth by the "conspiracy nuts" is that the US had an interest in occupying the region because their presence means they can fund and participate in the installation of new export infrastructure (like the BTC, in which US-based Unocal is involved). The war in Afghanistan meant bases in neighboring countries like Uzbekistan, Pakistan, and Kyrgyzstan, which allows for a permanent regional presence.
it doesn't really matter where the pipeline runs -the US couldn't have participated as easily if it hadn't established a presence.
maybe the conspiracy nuts should hold off on the apologies after unocal donates a portion of their profits to the poverty and war-stricken afghan people, or towards the all-too-modest $160 million reconstruction plan. (To put this into perspective: this doesn't even approach the size of the defecits some of the US' state budgets run).
what we call is a
er, what we call mind
other interesting philosophically-related items:
- panpsychism
- supervenience of mind on the brain
- the qualia problem (the crux of the mind-brain problem)
what i find interesting is the idea that what we call is a feature of all systems, and that qualia constitute the condition of being a system - and furthermore, that the reason other systems seem to have varying degrees of sentience has more to do with scale, perspective and apparent similarity than with some ill-defined threshold of consciousness.
since when did i say it was illegal?
even if they did inform them, at what point does it become OK to exploit something that is obviously not meant to be public knowledge?
i'm no democrat, but if the allegation is true, then the repubs done fucked up and someone should drop the hammer on them.
if we don't insist on punishment for political misdeeds, regardless of their party affiliations, then crooks will continue to reign in positions of power. fuck. that. root this shit out.
i was all for the impeachment of that sorry-ass intern fucker clinton and i sure as hell hope some serious investigations are made here too.
> Can we call that a SECURITY FLAW!!
many (probably most) vulnerabilities could ultimately be classified as configuration mistakes.
admins should be allowed to make mistakes from time to time. not auditing periodically to find them is harder to excuse.
not everyone on /. adheres to that juvenile interpretation of the hacker ethos.
besides, this isn't the same. if you correctly interpret the 2600 definition of hacking, the GOP folks should have disclosed the security vulnerability, not exploited it for their own benefit.
i'm not arguing that 4WD provides
doh, should say "doesn't provide"
> You seem to misunderstand the argument.
well, thanks for trying to clarify. look at the whole thread - i'm not arguing that 4WD provides superior handling in most conditions, but i am saying that in snow and ice, 4WD provides no significant control/safety advantage.
my physics IS rusty, and maybe I missed your point. but isn't your equation ignoring the lateral component of the force in a turn which slides the tail out? the torque on the fixed back wheels is only applied in the direction of the driveline - a slide would begin if this lateral inertial force exceeded the opposing lateral frictional force. since there is little lateral torque, the vehicle fishtails. and since the coefficient of friction is so low on snow and ice, the force required is much lower.
However, in a 4wd, each of the four drive wheels gets only 50 ft. lbs of torque. Because of this, you need less friction in order to maintain traction.
but you need SOME friction to maintain steering traction, and in snow you have close to no steering friction. so the benefits 4WD enjoys on a more grippy surface are minimized to be negligible.
Most high performance race cars are All Wheel Drive for (you guessed it!) better traction and handling!
F1 and indy cars are 2WD, but I agree they might benefit from 4WD. Rally cars are mostly 4WD.
> However, in a 4wd, each of the four drive
> wheels gets only 50 ft. lbs of torque. Because
> of this, you need less friction in order to
> maintain traction.
this assumes the conditions allow you to turn torque into greater traction. the torque can't be applied to the road if friction is reduced. good luck trying to hug curves in the snow in a 4wd explorer without cables. you'd have the same result as if you tried to hug a corner with a FWD.
just so you don't think i'm a completely didactic asshole (i am tho) and i don't think my sense of physics is too far off, i tried to find something to corroborate what i was spewing. see this guy's site. seems fairly unbiased, and it says basically that once moving, 4wd provides no safety advantage because it provides no additional steering traction, which is what i was saying.
> The reason for this is most of the time
> traction is not zero, as you say.
the point is that in a no-traction situation (e.g. a slideout or a fishtail) rear wheels won't be able to grab any better than front wheels. ignoring the presence of chains - if your rear wheels lose traction, you will slide whether or not they are spinning. on a flat road, it's just as easy to do a 360 in a 4WD as in a 2WD.
simply better than two. At least, that's my experience.
if i had an explanation of HOW I would be inclined to believe this.
Like most tools, don't hate the tool, hate the person who missuses it
you can't judge and classify all SUV owners. creating a list of appropriate uses is not a solution.
better would be to compensate for the possibility of misuse - perhaps by modifying the testing or licensing requirements. using an SUV as a status symbol doesn't automatically qualify as misuse.
limp better than a 4WD
er, than a FWD.