I think that my rebuttal was fairly well qualified. I think that your driving situation/technique does not apply to the vast majority of motorists out there on the road (given that most drivers don't spend the amount of time in the mountains that you do). I do appreciate that someone is treating their high inertia machine with the respect that it deserves. Cheers.
That doesn't make any sense. How often have you heard of overheated disc brakes in a modern car outside of a race track, or perhaps in mountains? In the latter situation, using a lower gear to preserve brakes is a great idea. However, I'm with the gpp on this - disc brakes are simple, cheap and easy to service, and they can take quite a bit of stress before they fade. While I don't have any problem with engine braking, the idea that brakes need to be preserved during everyday street driving is silly, unless you're a very aggressive driver. The only situations where I've ever had to preserve my brakes were on a race track or driving down a mountain.
The key is to drive a manual transmission and to hold in the clutch whenever you can(especially downhill) so that the car coasts(runs at idle) as much as possible.
And don't engine brake because that is poor form and is retarded. Use your damn brakes.
Actually, I believe that this is a misconception. A modern engine uses next to zero fuel while under vacuum (e.g in gear, foot off of throttle). While at idle, the fuel system has to use extra fuel to keep the engine from stalling. Coasting uses more fuel than simply lifting the throttle. Further, its not really engine braking if you're not downshifting as you decelerate - just lift off of the throttle and brake when necessary, just like coasting.
Finally, holding the clutch for long periods of time can wear your throwout bearing - if you must coast, neutral is usually best.
Must be. I mean, what is the big deal if a dog poops in someone's yard. Unless you have kids that play in the front yard, what does it matter? It is just nature's fertilizer....and it isn't like kids play out in the yards much today anyway, they're busy indoors eating cheetoes and playing video games.
I can understand in concrete 'jungle' of a very urban area where there aren't really many/any green areas, sure pick up after the dog, no one wants to dodge poop on the sidewalk, but, in the more prevalent living areas with lawns, green areas, etc....who cares if a dog poops here or there, it isn't like a human is gonna be walking through there and step on it....
I really hope that you don't own a dog, and if you do - I hope you're not my neighbor. If you are my neighbor and do have a dog, make sure your dog poops in your own yard; in fact, stay off of my lawn altogether. You're not doing me any more of a favor in 'fertilizing' my lawn than I would be by breaking into your house to crap in one of your houseplants.
AC: Ever worked a day in your life? I mean the hard kind of work that'll make you sweat during the day and blow black shit out of your nose and lungs at night? (or worse/similar) I doubt it.
Some people in the US work for a living doing hazardous work. Yeah even more hazardous than jockeying that desk of yours all day.
..."Play sand" like the kind you probably spend your days with has been thoroughly washed and graded for safety.
...Sure civilization has its warts, but if you don't like it, don't fake like there's no alternative and try to drag the rest of us back in time. Bye.
what you mean by "in-line" is "i've never thought about the issues enough to make a discernment between energy policy and foreign policy"
stop prejudicing me. read what i say. judge me on what i actually say. anything else is prejudice on your part and fails your own litmus test outlined in the comment you just made
Uhh -- I think that you're the one who threw foreign policy into this:
1. Chavez in Venezuela to support anti-American jingoism
2. Putin in Russia to support Russian Neoimperialism such as in Georgia
3. Bin Laden via Saudi Wahhabism, the ultra-fundamentalist form of Saudi Islam that gives rise to treating women like cattle, nonSunnis like subhumans, and Islamic terrorism in its myriad forms wherever such groups are supported by conservative Arabic funds
The simple truth is that you distorted the facts in order to support your position. I called you out on it. Now, you're just arguing with me and whining about an unfair judgment for the sake of it. I tried to be nice and back down a little, but you can't stop whining enough to actually address my original point. I think that I'm done talking to you, good day.
Electric cars last a lot longer, and I owned my last (traditional IC engine) car for 10 years. So in my book, that's a win.
Citation please? Are you suggesting that since an electric motor is simpler than an ICE, the whole thing lasts longer? What about batteries? What about the fact that the vehicle in the article is already 13 years old?
It doesn't matter. $12K still factors into a cost analysis, one way or another - unless the truck just happened to be lying around. I wish that people wouldn't post anonymously when flaming for once.
but staying involved by funding imperialism and terrorism with american petrodollars is not the way to do it
as for talk radio, i never listen to it. if you have a problem with the way someone thinks, you have to address what they actually think, rather than writing them off as a stereotype that actually has nothing to do with the person
I can't judge you based on what you actually think. I have no idea what you're thinking, so I have to address what you've written. In any case, maybe you're right -- perhaps it's not necessarily fair to classify you as an isolationist. However, your politically charged rhetoric is in-line with that of isolationists.
Is it fair to classify your data as politically charged rhetoric? I tend to think so since you're doctoring your facts to support a political position without offering any references.
To boil it down to a one-liner: nothing is ever that simple, especially when you throw politics into the mix.
your cash goes to:
1. Chavez in Venezuela to support anti-American jingoism
2. Putin in Russia to support Russian Neoimperialism such as in Georgia
3. Bin Laden via Saudi Wahhabism, the ultra-fundamentalist form of Saudi Islam that gives rise to treating women like cattle, nonSunnis like subhumans, and Islamic terrorism in its myriad forms wherever such groups are supported by conservative Arabic funds
Actually -- the cash goes to Canada first, then Saudi Arabia, then Mexico. After that, it's Venezuela at #4 -- and Russia is way the hell down the line at #10.
thems the facts. get with it America
Where do you get your facts, anyway, talk radio? Anyway, there's probably a place for your isolationist politics - good luck with that.
$12,000 to convert a car. Let's see - estimating $200 a month in gasoline costs, and assuming that electricity is free (which it isn't)...He might break even in 5 years.
As for paying $2 to keep one dollar from going overseas, I didn't know that Canada was overseas.
This was reported in February, shortly after Nvidia purchased PhysX. Of course, the GF9 series had not been released yet, so it was not mentioned in the news posting -- but future support sort of goes without saying. I'm fairly certain that it was reported on/. with a nearly identical headline in February as well.
Yep. Shareholders like Carl Icanh. I hear he took a payday loan to buy his yacht and now is behind on the mortgage payments. Not exactly--it's more like he bought a slightly run-down house (Yahoo) using a sub-prime loan with the intention of flipping it, but the city planner (Yang) refused the development permit to do an addition, and now he is upside-down in his mortgage and the only potential buyer (MSFT) keeps reducing his offer.
That sad sack of Sh!t Carl can go to hell with all the rest of the greedy real-estate speculators who lost their shirts in the subprime meltdown.
Yes, anyone who tries to purchase a commodity and sell it for profit deserves eternal damnation. All excess capital should be put into a government controlled "fund", like social security. Down with profits!
You can't steal it, but if you are able to make an exact replica of it while still leaving my car right where it is, please: be my guest!
Make me one while you're at it and then I'll have spare parts. Thanks. Umm when you make your own car from scratch costing you hundreds of thousands of dollars in research and development, then manufacture it and sell it for x dollars and some one figures out how to replicate it for free, lets see you say "be my guest"!
Actually, I'm sure that the manufacturer would try to buy the duplication technology. Manufacturing costs are a large percentage of the cost of a car. Furthermore, the material costs for a modern car are also quite high, there is no getting around that, so one wouldn't just get a 'free' car. Finally, the energy costs are also quite high.
I guess that the point is that the car analogy is bad. Intellectual property theft is not the same as physical property theft. I'm not saying that one is OK and one is not, but the two are absolutely different.
No matter the copy protection scheme, most cracks allow a user with average technical knowledge are able to easily circumvent a scheme.
Oops, sorry for the bad editing. That should have read "No matter the copy protection scheme, most cracks allow a user with average technical knowledge to easily circumvent any copy protection."
Exactly! People don't seem to want to learn nowadays.
Defeating copying schemes has always been an educational past-time of mine. I learned to write my 8's almost perfectly when I copied out, number by number, the Quarantine chart mass/velocity chart because I couldn't photocopy the black text on dark brown glossy paper.
I even improved my memory when I memorized both the X-Wing and Tie Fighter manual keywords... that was a lot of manuals for a 12 y/o - I actually think it helped. I wouldn't be where I am today if I wasn't capable of picking up a software manual:D
So, TPM is a way for me to spice up on my logic probing eh?
Matt
One particularly annoying part is that the paying customers must foot the bill for the copy protection. This applies to both motherboard components and licensing the protection scheme itself. Software developers/publishers won't just eat these costs out of the kindness of their hearts. It's usually a triple-hit for the consumer, who not only have to cover hardware and licensing costs, but generally have to endure the burden of intrusive copy-protection schemes. Whether it's entering a long and complex serial key, fumbling for a game disk that's not needed for anything more than verifying authenticity, or some other method -- it all tends to put an undue burden on a customer who has already paid for a product.
In my opinion, this actually encourages some people (who would otherwise pay for a product) to violate the terms of the EULA in one way or another. No matter the copy protection scheme, most cracks allow a user with average technical knowledge are able to easily circumvent a scheme.
Perhaps I'm missing something - but it sure would be nice to abandon these copy protection schemes. I seriously doubt that the practice prevents anything but the most cavalier copying/sharing - and I doubt that this copying is what developers/publishers are targeting.
But man are they throwing the book against him. I have no love for the frivolous nature of the lawsuits and ridiculous manner he presents his arguments but it sounds like they're really going over the top.
I mean, that list of charges against him reads like every lawyer's trial strategy.
Check out the guy's history. Thompson really appears to be a self-righteous megalomaniac who will never stop. If you read up on his history, he's had his wrists slapped enough times that he should have 'got it' by now. He's pissed off judges as well as AG's. It's not just video games, either. He has a long history of fighting rap music, goading local police departments into threatening retailers who sell albums with arrest for indecency. Whether or not his views are agreeable is not the point, however. It's his actions and sleazy tactics. Thompson has persistently angered enough people that the only solution is to the throw the book at him.
From his history, it's clear that he's the type of guy who thinks that everybody is nuts but him. In such situations, my experience is that the converse is usually true. When it's time to shut someone down, and gentle measures haven't worked -- that's when it's a smart to lay all of the cards down (all 31 counts) and rather than a gentle censure or (state) disbarment, actually making something stick.
The war on copyright infringement is not a sane way to spend the governments money... i mean come on, we're almost at 10 trillion in national debt and now they want to create an organization, with a 7 figure salary guy at the top that seizes computers that jimmy made mp3s on from his cd collection, not knowing that one of those cds had a rootkit that monitored this and turned him in to this organization?!?
WTF like we need a new agency sucking 20-40 million a year just harassing computer users who went on kazza once, not knowing what it was and deleting it when they saw all the pedo crap on it..
Hear hear. I couldn't agree more.
While I understand the need for law and order, I also realize that law enforcement and courts are already stretched thin. Our incarceration rate is also unacceptably high.
Turning a civil offense into a criminal offense while creating a new police agency and granting new powers to law enforcement is not a wise move. New powers are always used in unexpected ways, and the original intent and spirit of these new powers are often stretched beyond acceptable limits.
One word: Torque
A few more words: Your motorcycle generates very little of it. That's not really right. Motorcycles engines generally make more torque for their size (per liter) than car engines do. Rather than re-state my figures, have a look at a post that I wrote a few months ago. Read on to the response and my counter, where the original poster suggests that motorcycles have a crappy power band compared to a V8. Even there, I'm able to show that MC engines have a very wide usable power band.
Maybe I'm misreading the intent of your post, but it sounds as if you think it's the government's responsibility to ensure you have access to broadcast TV. It's not. Should the government buy you a new TV if yours breaks? Should you be reimbursed for the electricity your TV requires? The answers, of course, are no. Why then should the government pay for your DTV receiver?
It is (somewhat) the government's responsibility when they legislate the old TV's into obsolescence . Perhaps the GPP is a bit off in the assumption that everyone is entitled to this public resource on the taxpayer dime. However, if the government makes my old equipment obsolete and a cheap fix is available, I don't think that a free digital antennas are out of line.
Is the federal government obligated to provide access? Probably not - my guess is that it was put in place to appease network TV broadcasters and their OTA consumers. I don't have TV/cable, so it doesn't affect me one way or the other
Because the universities are trying to draw a line against other things. Airsoft for example, is banned in a lot of places.
These things don't get banned until somebody abuses the freedoms of the system and screws it up for everybody else.
Same old shit. Hope they push a good deal and get their Nerf back.
Are you sure about the abuse of the Nerf guns? My first thought was that it was a response to the recent gun violence on college campuses (e.g. Virginia Tech). With comments like "We do not allow weapons or facsimiles of weapons on campus" sounds like a reactionary policy that an overzealous administrator might create. (Granted, that was in 2006 - before the VT shootings).
Universities and colleges are extremely bureaucratic places, with silly policies abound. Perhaps you're right that there was some history of abuse that fostered these policies, I don't have anything to support either idea. Based upon supposition alone, my experience with higher education leads me to believe that this policy was created (and interpreted) based on a different motivation.
I wonder if a burning couch shoved off of a 5th story balcony could be considered a weapon (or a facsimile thereof)?;)
standard rack and pinion steering system is 120 lbs
drive by wire system using a joystick is 25 lbs.
Such changes all added throughout a car can dramatically improve fuel efficiency.
I completely agree with you in principle -- lighter cars are better cars in so many ways. I do not, however, agree that drive-by-wire systems are the best way to handle this.
While drive-by-wire may work well for a throttle, it does not make sense for steering or (to a lesser extent) brakes. Direct feedback through the wheel and brake pedal is important to many drivers. The wheel can help a driver feel when road conditions change and in emergency situations, such as when the front wheels are losing traction. Brake pedal feel is important as well, a driver can feel for brake fade. Further, these systems are extremely simple - it makes them easy to fix and cheap to produce.
I couldn't agree more that weight savings are important. Performance is categorically improved in lighter cars (acceleration, handling, braking, fuel economy). Furthermore, as weight is increased with amenities (sound proofing, airbags, nav system, plush carpeting, 19" wheels, etc) changes are made to compensate for the performance losses. These tend to sap fuel economy. More power used to haul the weight, more motor to deliver the power, wider tires to make the car still hold a corner, additional chassis bracing to handle the load -- these equal additional fuel consumption. Bloat can be trimmed, but I'm not sure that a drive-by-wire steering system is the best way to do it.
Blocking known residential blocks sucks as a solution as it removes some of the democracy of the net.
I (like others I'm sure, but maybe not so many of us these days) run a mail/web server from home. I just use it for personal mail. I have SPF and rDNS set up, I play by all the rules. Why block me because I use ADSL at home with a static IP ?
Whilst I appreciate that accepting mail from my IP is potentially a higher risk factor, blocking all residential blocks sems to me to be overkill.
If you have a static IP address, a non-residential service level, and (most importantly) a reverse DNS entry at your ISP -- emails from you will generally be delivered.
If you have a difficult time sending email to a recipient, mail admins tend to be reachable (unless they work for the federal government). Microsoft/MSN/Hotmail is my least favorite group to try reaching, but I've been able to contact the other big guys (AOL, gmail, etc) without too much headache. Most will understand and remove an IP/domain block, and some may even whitelist your domain.
It's clear that you understand the 'risk factors', and in the pattern of spam from residential networks. I also understand what you're saying from a 'democracy' standpoint, but from the standpoint of a former small-time mail admin, I'm fighting a losing battle against a better financed opponent with a profit margin that I'll never be able to touch. I've got too much to do to worry about the one home SMTP server in a million that is not spamming my users. Granted, I'm thinking of it from the standpoint of a private small-to-medium business operation, not an ISP with subscribers to worry about. My tendency was to whitelist our clients domains, and to use multiple RBL's. However, think about the admins who are dealing tens of millions of messages a day -- they're likely overwhelmed and will gladly block a few legitimate home domains to cut a significant chunk of their spam.
Personally, I have a bigger problem with ISP's blocking ports 25 and 80. They're called ISP's -- not most-of-the-I...SP's.
Slashdot Mirror
I think that my rebuttal was fairly well qualified. I think that your driving situation/technique does not apply to the vast majority of motorists out there on the road (given that most drivers don't spend the amount of time in the mountains that you do). I do appreciate that someone is treating their high inertia machine with the respect that it deserves. Cheers.
That doesn't make any sense. How often have you heard of overheated disc brakes in a modern car outside of a race track, or perhaps in mountains? In the latter situation, using a lower gear to preserve brakes is a great idea. However, I'm with the gpp on this - disc brakes are simple, cheap and easy to service, and they can take quite a bit of stress before they fade. While I don't have any problem with engine braking, the idea that brakes need to be preserved during everyday street driving is silly, unless you're a very aggressive driver. The only situations where I've ever had to preserve my brakes were on a race track or driving down a mountain.
The key is to drive a manual transmission and to hold in the clutch whenever you can(especially downhill) so that the car coasts(runs at idle) as much as possible. And don't engine brake because that is poor form and is retarded. Use your damn brakes.
Actually, I believe that this is a misconception. A modern engine uses next to zero fuel while under vacuum (e.g in gear, foot off of throttle). While at idle, the fuel system has to use extra fuel to keep the engine from stalling. Coasting uses more fuel than simply lifting the throttle. Further, its not really engine braking if you're not downshifting as you decelerate - just lift off of the throttle and brake when necessary, just like coasting.
Finally, holding the clutch for long periods of time can wear your throwout bearing - if you must coast, neutral is usually best.
I really hope that you don't own a dog, and if you do - I hope you're not my neighbor. If you are my neighbor and do have a dog, make sure your dog poops in your own yard; in fact, stay off of my lawn altogether. You're not doing me any more of a favor in 'fertilizing' my lawn than I would be by breaking into your house to crap in one of your houseplants.
AC: Ever worked a day in your life? I mean the hard kind of work that'll make you sweat during the day and blow black shit out of your nose and lungs at night? (or worse/similar) I doubt it.
Some people in the US work for a living doing hazardous work. Yeah even more hazardous than jockeying that desk of yours all day.
..."Play sand" like the kind you probably spend your days with has been thoroughly washed and graded for safety.
...Sure civilization has its warts, but if you don't like it, don't fake like there's no alternative and try to drag the rest of us back in time. Bye.
Lighten up, Francis.
what you mean by "in-line" is "i've never thought about the issues enough to make a discernment between energy policy and foreign policy"
stop prejudicing me. read what i say. judge me on what i actually say. anything else is prejudice on your part and fails your own litmus test outlined in the comment you just made
Uhh -- I think that you're the one who threw foreign policy into this:
The simple truth is that you distorted the facts in order to support your position. I called you out on it. Now, you're just arguing with me and whining about an unfair judgment for the sake of it. I tried to be nice and back down a little, but you can't stop whining enough to actually address my original point. I think that I'm done talking to you, good day.
Electric cars last a lot longer, and I owned my last (traditional IC engine) car for 10 years. So in my book, that's a win.
Citation please? Are you suggesting that since an electric motor is simpler than an ICE, the whole thing lasts longer? What about batteries? What about the fact that the vehicle in the article is already 13 years old?
It doesn't matter. $12K still factors into a cost analysis, one way or another - unless the truck just happened to be lying around. I wish that people wouldn't post anonymously when flaming for once.
the usa should stay involved on the world stage
but staying involved by funding imperialism and terrorism with american petrodollars is not the way to do it
as for talk radio, i never listen to it. if you have a problem with the way someone thinks, you have to address what they actually think, rather than writing them off as a stereotype that actually has nothing to do with the person
I can't judge you based on what you actually think. I have no idea what you're thinking, so I have to address what you've written. In any case, maybe you're right -- perhaps it's not necessarily fair to classify you as an isolationist. However, your politically charged rhetoric is in-line with that of isolationists.
Is it fair to classify your data as politically charged rhetoric? I tend to think so since you're doctoring your facts to support a political position without offering any references.
To boil it down to a one-liner: nothing is ever that simple, especially when you throw politics into the mix.
You're right -- we produce approximately 20% of our own oil.
Actually -- the cash goes to Canada first, then Saudi Arabia, then Mexico. After that, it's Venezuela at #4 -- and Russia is way the hell down the line at #10.
Where do you get your facts, anyway, talk radio? Anyway, there's probably a place for your isolationist politics - good luck with that.
$12,000 to convert a car. Let's see - estimating $200 a month in gasoline costs, and assuming that electricity is free (which it isn't)...He might break even in 5 years.
As for paying $2 to keep one dollar from going overseas, I didn't know that Canada was overseas.
This was reported in February, shortly after Nvidia purchased PhysX. Of course, the GF9 series had not been released yet, so it was not mentioned in the news posting -- but future support sort of goes without saying. I'm fairly certain that it was reported on /. with a nearly identical headline in February as well.
Yes, anyone who tries to purchase a commodity and sell it for profit deserves eternal damnation. All excess capital should be put into a government controlled "fund", like social security. Down with profits!
Actually, I'm sure that the manufacturer would try to buy the duplication technology. Manufacturing costs are a large percentage of the cost of a car. Furthermore, the material costs for a modern car are also quite high, there is no getting around that, so one wouldn't just get a 'free' car. Finally, the energy costs are also quite high.
I guess that the point is that the car analogy is bad. Intellectual property theft is not the same as physical property theft. I'm not saying that one is OK and one is not, but the two are absolutely different.
Oops, sorry for the bad editing. That should have read "No matter the copy protection scheme, most cracks allow a user with average technical knowledge to easily circumvent any copy protection."
One particularly annoying part is that the paying customers must foot the bill for the copy protection. This applies to both motherboard components and licensing the protection scheme itself. Software developers/publishers won't just eat these costs out of the kindness of their hearts. It's usually a triple-hit for the consumer, who not only have to cover hardware and licensing costs, but generally have to endure the burden of intrusive copy-protection schemes. Whether it's entering a long and complex serial key, fumbling for a game disk that's not needed for anything more than verifying authenticity, or some other method -- it all tends to put an undue burden on a customer who has already paid for a product.
In my opinion, this actually encourages some people (who would otherwise pay for a product) to violate the terms of the EULA in one way or another. No matter the copy protection scheme, most cracks allow a user with average technical knowledge are able to easily circumvent a scheme.
Perhaps I'm missing something - but it sure would be nice to abandon these copy protection schemes. I seriously doubt that the practice prevents anything but the most cavalier copying/sharing - and I doubt that this copying is what developers/publishers are targeting.
Check out the guy's history. Thompson really appears to be a self-righteous megalomaniac who will never stop. If you read up on his history, he's had his wrists slapped enough times that he should have 'got it' by now. He's pissed off judges as well as AG's. It's not just video games, either. He has a long history of fighting rap music, goading local police departments into threatening retailers who sell albums with arrest for indecency. Whether or not his views are agreeable is not the point, however. It's his actions and sleazy tactics. Thompson has persistently angered enough people that the only solution is to the throw the book at him.
From his history, it's clear that he's the type of guy who thinks that everybody is nuts but him. In such situations, my experience is that the converse is usually true. When it's time to shut someone down, and gentle measures haven't worked -- that's when it's a smart to lay all of the cards down (all 31 counts) and rather than a gentle censure or (state) disbarment, actually making something stick.
Hear hear. I couldn't agree more.
While I understand the need for law and order, I also realize that law enforcement and courts are already stretched thin. Our incarceration rate is also unacceptably high.
Turning a civil offense into a criminal offense while creating a new police agency and granting new powers to law enforcement is not a wise move. New powers are always used in unexpected ways, and the original intent and spirit of these new powers are often stretched beyond acceptable limits.
Maybe I'm misreading the intent of your post, but it sounds as if you think it's the government's responsibility to ensure you have access to broadcast TV. It's not. Should the government buy you a new TV if yours breaks? Should you be reimbursed for the electricity your TV requires? The answers, of course, are no. Why then should the government pay for your DTV receiver?
It is (somewhat) the government's responsibility when they legislate the old TV's into obsolescence . Perhaps the GPP is a bit off in the assumption that everyone is entitled to this public resource on the taxpayer dime. However, if the government makes my old equipment obsolete and a cheap fix is available, I don't think that a free digital antennas are out of line.
Is the federal government obligated to provide access? Probably not - my guess is that it was put in place to appease network TV broadcasters and their OTA consumers. I don't have TV/cable, so it doesn't affect me one way or the other
These things don't get banned until somebody abuses the freedoms of the system and screws it up for everybody else.
Same old shit. Hope they push a good deal and get their Nerf back.
Are you sure about the abuse of the Nerf guns? My first thought was that it was a response to the recent gun violence on college campuses (e.g. Virginia Tech). With comments like "We do not allow weapons or facsimiles of weapons on campus" sounds like a reactionary policy that an overzealous administrator might create. (Granted, that was in 2006 - before the VT shootings).
Universities and colleges are extremely bureaucratic places, with silly policies abound. Perhaps you're right that there was some history of abuse that fostered these policies, I don't have anything to support either idea. Based upon supposition alone, my experience with higher education leads me to believe that this policy was created (and interpreted) based on a different motivation.
I wonder if a burning couch shoved off of a 5th story balcony could be considered a weapon (or a facsimile thereof)? ;)
drive by wire system using a joystick is 25 lbs.
Such changes all added throughout a car can dramatically improve fuel efficiency.
I completely agree with you in principle -- lighter cars are better cars in so many ways. I do not, however, agree that drive-by-wire systems are the best way to handle this.
While drive-by-wire may work well for a throttle, it does not make sense for steering or (to a lesser extent) brakes. Direct feedback through the wheel and brake pedal is important to many drivers. The wheel can help a driver feel when road conditions change and in emergency situations, such as when the front wheels are losing traction. Brake pedal feel is important as well, a driver can feel for brake fade. Further, these systems are extremely simple - it makes them easy to fix and cheap to produce.
I couldn't agree more that weight savings are important. Performance is categorically improved in lighter cars (acceleration, handling, braking, fuel economy). Furthermore, as weight is increased with amenities (sound proofing, airbags, nav system, plush carpeting, 19" wheels, etc) changes are made to compensate for the performance losses. These tend to sap fuel economy. More power used to haul the weight, more motor to deliver the power, wider tires to make the car still hold a corner, additional chassis bracing to handle the load -- these equal additional fuel consumption. Bloat can be trimmed, but I'm not sure that a drive-by-wire steering system is the best way to do it.
I (like others I'm sure, but maybe not so many of us these days) run a mail/web server from home. I just use it for personal mail. I have SPF and rDNS set up, I play by all the rules. Why block me because I use ADSL at home with a static IP ?
Whilst I appreciate that accepting mail from my IP is potentially a higher risk factor, blocking all residential blocks sems to me to be overkill.
If you have a static IP address, a non-residential service level, and (most importantly) a reverse DNS entry at your ISP -- emails from you will generally be delivered.
If you have a difficult time sending email to a recipient, mail admins tend to be reachable (unless they work for the federal government). Microsoft/MSN/Hotmail is my least favorite group to try reaching, but I've been able to contact the other big guys (AOL, gmail, etc) without too much headache. Most will understand and remove an IP/domain block, and some may even whitelist your domain.
It's clear that you understand the 'risk factors', and in the pattern of spam from residential networks. I also understand what you're saying from a 'democracy' standpoint, but from the standpoint of a former small-time mail admin, I'm fighting a losing battle against a better financed opponent with a profit margin that I'll never be able to touch. I've got too much to do to worry about the one home SMTP server in a million that is not spamming my users. Granted, I'm thinking of it from the standpoint of a private small-to-medium business operation, not an ISP with subscribers to worry about. My tendency was to whitelist our clients domains, and to use multiple RBL's. However, think about the admins who are dealing tens of millions of messages a day -- they're likely overwhelmed and will gladly block a few legitimate home domains to cut a significant chunk of their spam.
Personally, I have a bigger problem with ISP's blocking ports 25 and 80. They're called ISP's -- not most-of-the-I...SP's.