Not exactly.. those providers selling DISCOUNT phones, you know, for "free" or for "$5" when you purchase your SIM.... in a package deal, will have the phone locked to only read sims from that provider. That means that if the provider is regional, and all your friends also have phones from the same provider... you can still swap phones all you like.
You can still take your SIM and use it in any unrestricted GSM phone.
It's not like open GSM phones are hard to find either.. basically every cellular shop is full of them. The locked ones are just cheaper, that's all.
Why do you find those numbers to be uninformed? Anyone who has ever looked at advertising with Gator, which is what their business is, knows full well what those numbers represent.
From an advertiser's point of view, Gator is the most successful, targetted service out there, with the highest rate of return. It's also expensive.
Given gator's operating profits, $150M is not a rediculous IPO figure. IN fact, it's quite low.
Is Gator scum? Yes. Spyware? Yes. Dodgy install practices? Yes.. but don't make the mistake of thinking it's a 2 bit company just trying to hype up vaporware...... Gator is the leading company for targetted advertising on the net.
Give it a rest. Sniffers do look at packets. Or packets AND frames. However you want to look at it. Does the sniffer show you all the details of the frame? Preamble? Timing? If not, it's fair enough to call it a packet... most poeple are after the layer 3 information anyway, or higher.
Statistical counters? Those don't solve the problems most people use sniffers for.. thought hey are certainly handy, they are far from absolutely necessary. They do not answer questions that you might want.
There is not necessarily ANY need to subnet things on a 500 device network... it purely depends on the applications involved. The only reason to sbunet is to create separate broadcast domains, in case there is lots of broadcast traffic, and to isolate things from being discovered over broadcast. Example: So many hosts the arp traffic is clogging up the entire network. You can run 500 devices on a network with old dumb switches just fine.
Switch hops from one end to the other - irrelevant if you are switched. Saying "Any more than 3 and you should subnet" doens't make any sense nowadays. You can have 25 hops, things will still work fine. The old 5-4-3 rule applies to single collision domains... and with switches, each port is it's own collision domain. You could chain thousands switches across the country, it's not a problem.
Hubs are evil unless they are strategically placed. Example: Hub at internet gateway to facilitate debugging. Not a problem because the # of packets per second is not going anywhere near the media limit, and there are only a small handful of devices.
I grab packets with that, and view them in ethereal.
For debugging application level problems with tcp stuff, sometimes sniffit is more convenient.
Now.. for situations where I don't have a suitable machine in the right place to sniff what I want... and don't want to start re-cabling things... ettercap can be handy, specifically the arp poisoning stuff, so you can sniff traffic off a switched network. Make sure you have clear in your head the ramifications of how it works, though, or you might end up with a bit of a mess.
The best too by far, though, is your own head.. having a really clear idea of what it is you are SUPPOSED to see makes it a lot easier to find out what's wrong.
I do think you are bang-on here. Macs are the luxury items of computing. It's not the most open, or the cheapest.. but damned if it's not the most enjoyable system I've ever had. And like a nice luxury car, I know I paid for that enjoyment with cash.
As it is, nothing in the open source world comes across as cleanly and nice as OSX... therefore, OSX has value to me.
As for being "Elitist".. that's a bit smug. It's quality stuff, for a price. If an equal experience were available to me for free, I wouldn't be paying money to Apple. As long as Apple keeps ahead of the game... why on earth should they not keep prices up? They are an awfully successful company for an underdog with a small marketshare compared to their competitor.
That said.. like many things... luxury is not always more expensive. A poor man buys clothing that only lasts, say, 6 months, because it's all he can afford. The rich man buying clothing for 2x the price ends up with material and quality that lasts 4x as long, or more.... more than equal to the price in the long run.
The useful life of a mac for the average mac users tends to be much longer than the useful life of a PC... less reformats, less urge to buy the latest mac, etc. IT's not for everyone, certainly not for an overclocking tweaker kid...
I'm A Unix guy by trade.. and a while back I got into osX. This little 800Mhz G3 iBook is still suiting me just fine.. I really can't find a good reason to drop a few grand on a newer mac. I can afford it, the money is set aside for it, but there is no real benefit to my computing experience to buying a new mac at this point, even though mine is quite dated.
The open source world sets a good baseline for value.. making it harder and harder to sell garbage as real product.... but highly usable and elegant computing takes a level of control over a project that most open projects do not yet have.
What we need is an inspired usability freak with the attitude of Theo de Raadt to produce an apple clone.
That's got nothing to do with the boost pressure.. the diverter lets the output of the compressor go somewhere (back to the intake) when the throttle is closed.
A blowoff does a similar thing, but vents the excess pressure to atmosphere, and sounds cooler.
The wastegate is something totally different, and controls the maximum boost pressure allowed.
Not the same thing.
on
Hack Your Ride
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The wastegate is not the same thing as a diverter/blowoff.. both exist at the same time.
The wastegate serves to limit the boost pressure.. if pressure rises too high the wastegate vents excess pressure to atmosphere. By raising the release pressure on the wastegate, you allow the turbo to generate more boost. On some vehicles, this is electronically controllable, so in theory (and practice) the ECU can adjust the boost on the fly.
A blowoff or diverter, serve to let air flow cleanly when the throttle is closed, so as not to create backpressure on the turbo... different thing entirely.
Re:So let me get this straight...
on
Hack Your Ride
·
· Score: 1
This isn't some guy with an eprom burner. It is a company with real engineers who have repeatedly tested and benchmarked their modifications on real cars on a real dyno over and over and over again, and sell their modifications in volume, in an industry where selling things that break cars will quickly put you out of business.
We aren't talking about strapping rocket boosters onto cars here.. the difference in power isn't THAT Much.. though it's enough to make it worthwhile.
My car is 180HP. If I do some work to it and make it 220HP (which would be fantastic)... am I somehow being more dangerous? How about the guy with the 600HP ferarri next to me?
Warranty, in the US anyway, is not invalidated unless they can prove the modifications you made contributed to the failure... Modifying your ride is not necessarily illegal. Simply making it faster is definately NOT illegal. Emissions and whatnot, yes, may be... You don't mod leased cars! Insurance? Not likely... but again, if the insurance company could show that you caused the damage you are trying to claim, they obviously wouldn't have to pay.
these software mods are generally well and widely tested.... it's not like you go in and start tweaking yourself. The companies that create them test them rather thoroughy, and they are generally widely used and reviewed. Modifications that wreck cars and kill people don't tend to be very popular.
The other reason, I guess, is that it's YOUR car... nobody said it had to stay the way it was from the factory. There are safety and emission rules, yes, but nothing at all that says you can't change your car.
Unlike most countries, the US now makes all connecting passengers go through customs, require proper visas, etc.
There used to be a few routes where you could either stay on the same plane, or stay in an international lounge.. now the US makes you de-plane and go through immigration & customs in ALL cases.
And I travel quite a bit, internationally, thanks. I'm not just making this shit up to argue, I'm telling it from personal experience over the last few years of catching flights that connect at US airports (Houston, Miami, Dallas, etc), and from the experiences of co-workers who do the same.
If you know of an international flight that connects in the US and works as you say, with proper international holding areas, please, let me know what it is, I'd be interested to know.
How does taking my photograph and fingerprints when I make a connecting flight through the US let you verify who I am, unless you have proper verified photographs and fingerprints to begin with?
This is how the US plans to get a database of fingerprints and photographs of EVERYONE who travels.
First it was "arabs" Then it was "Everyone who needed a visa" Now it's "Just about everyone else"
Not too long after that, it will be "Americans too"
This new procedure is not clogging up airports. IT is efficiently and well implemented. The only problem is that it is wrong.
Yes, the US is not my country.. and if they want to insist I be fingerprinted and photographed merely to catch a connecting flight at one of their international airports... that's their perogative.
My perogative is to take slightly longer layovers and fly through more polite countries who treat travellers with a bit more respect, like Mexico.
Scientifically, the speed at which sound travels through a gas depends on 1) the ratio of the specific heat at constant pressure to the constant volume, 2) the temperature of the gas, and 3) the gas constant (pressure/density X temperature). This is represented by the formula:
a = Square Root(g R T)
where
a = speed of sound g = ratio of the specific heat at constant pressure to the specific heat at constant volume R = universal gas constant T = Temperature (Kelvin or Rankin)
Fortunately, in the earth's atmosphere (a gas) several of these variables are constant. In our atmosphere, g is a constant 1.4. R is a constant 1718 ft-lb/slug-degrees Rankin (in the English system of units) or 287 N-m/kg-degree Kelvin (in SI units). With g and R as constant values, this results in the speed of sound depending solely on the square root of the temperature of the atmosphere.
Except Apple Inc. is publicly traded, and has to disclose such things by law. A private company does not.
So.. where then do we draw the line between spammers and every other privately run business out there? Require complete financial transparency for everyone? Your salary at the quickie-mart? Your full income as a private consultant?
etc.
Re:Feasibiliy of High Speed Travel
on
X-43A Hits Mach 7
·
· Score: 1
Yes.. I didn't want to get too detailed.
I realize that for joe average this would be straining after a time.. the point is that it's certainly not "far too much".
The justice department was not arguing against communities running their own telcos.. they are against having the local government run the telco... as it destroys competition. Goverments can prop up bad business with tax dollars, private businesses just go broke.
The community is completely free to form a co-op, like many do, and run it's own telco.
Those generally apply only to condo complexes? Strata developments? If you own your own house and property, you can generally have a clothesline outside, unless local by-laws forbid it.
A lot of people still live in homes where they don't need permission to paint their house from the neighbors.
If it reached escape velocity it wouldn't be orbiting.. it would be escaping, never to return.
Re:Feasibiliy of High Speed Travel
on
X-43A Hits Mach 7
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Not that massive.
Shall we calculate?
Let's say for rough estimation purposes mach is about 1000km/h, or 277.8 m/s So mach 7 is 1944m/s
Let's say that G is 9.8m/s^2 (It is)
1944/9.8= 198.4 seconds
In other words, at 1G, after 3 minutes and a bit,you will already be cruising at mach 7.
IN that time, you would have gone approximately 193km.
Factor in the same for deceleration... and we could say.
You could comfortably go 400km in about six minutes. Less than that and this speed is not practical. For that matter, you spend more time in preparation and airports than you do on an aircraft for a 400km flight in the first place... so mach 7 would be really practical for longer flights.
Re:Stupid, Slightly OT Question
on
X-43A Hits Mach 7
·
· Score: 5, Informative
It's not. This whole experiment is not at all about speed, and everything about a new engine design.
IIRC, Mach5 is the speed at which the scramjet is released, and ignited... up until then it's just being boosted by a conventional rocket. During the first test, the scramjet failed.
During this test, it worked, pushing the rocket up another mach or two.
This was not meant to be any kind of speed record.. that's just how fast you need to go to get a scramjet working.
The speed of sound in a gas is affected mainly by temperature... not density or pressure.
From the page you just linked to: "The speed of sound depends on the state of the gas; more specifically, the square root of the temperature of the gas."
Mach at 35,000 ft is 663mph
Mach at 150,000 ft is 732mph
The reason higher aircraft hit higher mach numbers is due to decreased air resistance... concorde can hit mach at 50,000 ft, but not at 20,000.. not because mach is perceptibly slower, but because there is less drag.
It was? Who was marketing alphas to the PC market?
Just a nanny whiny note...
on
NASA Tests X-43A
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
A lot of posts are commenting on how fast this is.
Speed is not the point of this experiment.. there have already been a number of aircraft faster than this, much faster.
The point is that, after boosting it to mach 5 with a conventional engine, it was set free for the scramjet to work, and it boosted it another mach or two.. meaning the scramjet worked.
Not having to carry liquid oxygen means you can now carry more fuel, cargo, whatever.
Slashdot Mirror
It won't change the world.
Running linux under windows is not the same thing as running linux. Period.
It may be better than running VMWare or the like.. but it's not "2 systems on one computer."
It's still windows, with all that implies.
Unless there is some miraculous (and I do mean miraculous) kernel level integration..... there is no performance benefit or anything like that...
So.. is it neat? yeah.. kinda. Is it revolutionary? Hardly.
XEN is far cooler....
Not exactly.. those providers selling DISCOUNT phones, you know, for "free" or for "$5" when you purchase your SIM.... in a package deal, will have the phone locked to only read sims from that provider. That means that if the provider is regional, and all your friends also have phones from the same provider... you can still swap phones all you like.
You can still take your SIM and use it in any unrestricted GSM phone.
It's not like open GSM phones are hard to find either.. basically every cellular shop is full of them. The locked ones are just cheaper, that's all.
But that's what he just said... set protocol standards.. it is exactly like GSM.
Rather than have the authorities tell us what we can use each band for, tell us what protocol to use, and let us figure out what to use them for.
Wider, fatter open spectrum... look what has been done so far in 2.4Ghz ISM. and it's a SHITTY piece of spectrum.
Open up some real specttrum, set teh access standards, but don't tell us what to use it FOR.. and then we'll get somewhere.
Why do you find those numbers to be uninformed? Anyone who has ever looked at advertising with Gator, which is what their business is, knows full well what those numbers represent.
From an advertiser's point of view, Gator is the most successful, targetted service out there, with the highest rate of return. It's also expensive.
Given gator's operating profits, $150M is not a rediculous IPO figure. IN fact, it's quite low.
Is Gator scum? Yes. Spyware? Yes. Dodgy install practices? Yes.. but don't make the mistake of thinking it's a 2 bit company just trying to hype up vaporware...... Gator is the leading company for targetted advertising on the net.
Give it a rest. Sniffers do look at packets. Or packets AND frames. However you want to look at it. Does the sniffer show you all the details of the frame? Preamble? Timing?
If not, it's fair enough to call it a packet... most poeple are after the layer 3 information anyway, or higher.
Statistical counters? Those don't solve the problems most people use sniffers for.. thought hey are certainly handy, they are far from absolutely necessary. They do not answer questions that you might want.
There is not necessarily ANY need to subnet things on a 500 device network... it purely depends on the applications involved. The only reason to sbunet is to create separate broadcast domains, in case there is lots of broadcast traffic, and to isolate things from being discovered over broadcast. Example: So many hosts the arp traffic is clogging up the entire network. You can run 500 devices on a network with old dumb switches just fine.
Switch hops from one end to the other - irrelevant if you are switched. Saying "Any more than 3 and you should subnet" doens't make any sense nowadays. You can have 25 hops, things will still work fine. The old 5-4-3 rule applies to single collision domains... and with switches, each port is it's own collision domain. You could chain thousands switches across the country, it's not a problem.
Hubs are evil unless they are strategically placed. Example: Hub at internet gateway to facilitate debugging. Not a problem because the # of packets per second is not going anywhere near the media limit, and there are only a small handful of devices.
I use:
tcpdump, whenever possible.
I grab packets with that, and view them in ethereal.
For debugging application level problems with tcp stuff, sometimes sniffit is more convenient.
Now.. for situations where I don't have a suitable machine in the right place to sniff what I want... and don't want to start re-cabling things... ettercap can be handy, specifically the arp poisoning stuff, so you can sniff traffic off a switched network. Make sure you have clear in your head the ramifications of how it works, though, or you might end up with a bit of a mess.
The best too by far, though, is your own head.. having a really clear idea of what it is you are SUPPOSED to see makes it a lot easier to find out what's wrong.
I do think you are bang-on here. Macs are the luxury items of computing. It's not the most open, or the cheapest.. but damned if it's not the most enjoyable system I've ever had. And like a nice luxury car, I know I paid for that enjoyment with cash.
As it is, nothing in the open source world comes across as cleanly and nice as OSX... therefore, OSX has value to me.
As for being "Elitist".. that's a bit smug. It's quality stuff, for a price. If an equal experience were available to me for free, I wouldn't be paying money to Apple. As long as Apple keeps ahead of the game... why on earth should they not keep prices up? They are an awfully successful company for an underdog with a small marketshare compared to their competitor.
That said.. like many things... luxury is not always more expensive. A poor man buys clothing that only lasts, say, 6 months, because it's all he can afford. The rich man buying clothing for 2x the price ends up with material and quality that lasts 4x as long, or more.... more than equal to the price in the long run.
The useful life of a mac for the average mac users tends to be much longer than the useful life of a PC... less reformats, less urge to buy the latest mac, etc. IT's not for everyone, certainly not for an overclocking tweaker kid...
I'm A Unix guy by trade.. and a while back I got into osX. This little 800Mhz G3 iBook is still suiting me just fine.. I really can't find a good reason to drop a few grand on a newer mac. I can afford it, the money is set aside for it, but there is no real benefit to my computing experience to buying a new mac at this point, even though mine is quite dated.
The open source world sets a good baseline for value.. making it harder and harder to sell garbage as real product.... but highly usable and elegant computing takes a level of control over a project that most open projects do not yet have.
What we need is an inspired usability freak with the attitude of Theo de Raadt to produce an apple clone.
Too many cooks make linux less usable.
That's got nothing to do with the boost pressure.. the diverter lets the output of the compressor go somewhere (back to the intake) when the throttle is closed.
A blowoff does a similar thing, but vents the excess pressure to atmosphere, and sounds cooler.
The wastegate is something totally different, and controls the maximum boost pressure allowed.
The wastegate is not the same thing as a diverter/blowoff.. both exist at the same time.
The wastegate serves to limit the boost pressure.. if pressure rises too high the wastegate vents excess pressure to atmosphere. By raising the release pressure on the wastegate, you allow the turbo to generate more boost. On some vehicles, this is electronically controllable, so in theory (and practice) the ECU can adjust the boost on the fly.
A blowoff or diverter, serve to let air flow cleanly when the throttle is closed, so as not to create backpressure on the turbo... different thing entirely.
This isn't some guy with an eprom burner. It is a company with real engineers who have repeatedly tested and benchmarked their modifications on real cars on a real dyno over and over and over again, and sell their modifications in volume, in an industry where selling things that break cars will quickly put you out of business.
We aren't talking about strapping rocket boosters onto cars here.. the difference in power isn't THAT Much.. though it's enough to make it worthwhile.
My car is 180HP. If I do some work to it and make it 220HP (which would be fantastic)... am I somehow being more dangerous? How about the guy with the 600HP ferarri next to me?
Warranty, in the US anyway, is not invalidated unless they can prove the modifications you made contributed to the failure...
Modifying your ride is not necessarily illegal. Simply making it faster is definately NOT illegal. Emissions and whatnot, yes, may be...
You don't mod leased cars!
Insurance? Not likely... but again, if the insurance company could show that you caused the damage you are trying to claim, they obviously wouldn't have to pay.
these software mods are generally well and widely tested.... it's not like you go in and start tweaking yourself. The companies that create them test them rather thoroughy, and they are generally widely used and reviewed. Modifications that wreck cars and kill people don't tend to be very popular.
The other reason, I guess, is that it's YOUR car... nobody said it had to stay the way it was from the factory. There are safety and emission rules, yes, but nothing at all that says you can't change your car.
Dumb question from me here.. as I'm relatively new to this (but considering chipping my new jetta)
How does the chip control boost pressure? Is this particular to your model? Does it have some kind of electronically adjustable wastegate?
Unlike most countries, the US now makes all connecting passengers go through customs, require proper visas, etc.
There used to be a few routes where you could either stay on the same plane, or stay in an international lounge.. now the US makes you de-plane and go through immigration & customs in ALL cases.
And I travel quite a bit, internationally, thanks. I'm not just making this shit up to argue, I'm telling it from personal experience over the last few years of catching flights that connect at US airports (Houston, Miami, Dallas, etc), and from the experiences of co-workers who do the same.
If you know of an international flight that connects in the US and works as you say, with proper international holding areas, please, let me know what it is, I'd be interested to know.
Strong authentication?
How does taking my photograph and fingerprints when I make a connecting flight through the US let you verify who I am, unless you have proper verified photographs and fingerprints to begin with?
This is how the US plans to get a database of fingerprints and photographs of EVERYONE who travels.
First it was "arabs"
Then it was "Everyone who needed a visa"
Now it's "Just about everyone else"
Not too long after that, it will be "Americans too"
This new procedure is not clogging up airports. IT is efficiently and well implemented. The only problem is that it is wrong.
Yes, the US is not my country.. and if they want to insist I be fingerprinted and photographed merely to catch a connecting flight at one of their international airports... that's their perogative.
My perogative is to take slightly longer layovers and fly through more polite countries who treat travellers with a bit more respect, like Mexico.
Scientifically, the speed at which sound travels through a gas depends on 1) the ratio of the specific heat at constant pressure to the constant volume, 2) the temperature of the gas, and 3) the gas constant (pressure/density X temperature). This is represented by the formula:
a = Square Root(g R T)
where
a = speed of sound
g = ratio of the specific heat at constant pressure to the specific heat at constant volume
R = universal gas constant
T = Temperature (Kelvin or Rankin)
Fortunately, in the earth's atmosphere (a gas) several of these variables are constant. In our atmosphere, g is a constant 1.4. R is a constant 1718 ft-lb/slug-degrees Rankin (in the English system of units) or 287 N-m/kg-degree Kelvin (in SI units). With g and R as constant values, this results in the speed of sound depending solely on the square root of the temperature of the atmosphere.
Good idea.
Except Apple Inc. is publicly traded, and has to disclose such things by law. A private company does not.
So.. where then do we draw the line between spammers and every other privately run business out there? Require complete financial transparency for everyone? Your salary at the quickie-mart? Your full income as a private consultant?
etc.
Yes.. I didn't want to get too detailed.
I realize that for joe average this would be straining after a time.. the point is that it's certainly not "far too much".
The justice department was not arguing against communities running their own telcos.. they are against having the local government run the telco... as it destroys competition. Goverments can prop up bad business with tax dollars, private businesses just go broke.
The community is completely free to form a co-op, like many do, and run it's own telco.
Those generally apply only to condo complexes? Strata developments? If you own your own house and property, you can generally have a clothesline outside, unless local by-laws forbid it.
A lot of people still live in homes where they don't need permission to paint their house from the neighbors.
If it reached escape velocity it wouldn't be orbiting.. it would be escaping, never to return.
Not that massive.
,you will already be cruising at mach 7.
Shall we calculate?
Let's say for rough estimation purposes mach is about 1000km/h, or 277.8 m/s
So mach 7 is 1944m/s
Let's say that G is 9.8m/s^2 (It is)
1944/9.8= 198.4 seconds
In other words, at 1G, after 3 minutes and a bit
IN that time, you would have gone approximately 193km.
Factor in the same for deceleration... and we could say.
You could comfortably go 400km in about six minutes. Less than that and this speed is not practical.
For that matter, you spend more time in preparation and airports than you do on an aircraft for a 400km flight in the first place... so mach 7 would be really practical for longer flights.
It's not. This whole experiment is not at all about speed, and everything about a new engine design.
IIRC, Mach5 is the speed at which the scramjet is released, and ignited... up until then it's just being boosted by a conventional rocket.
During the first test, the scramjet failed.
During this test, it worked, pushing the rocket up another mach or two.
This was not meant to be any kind of speed record.. that's just how fast you need to go to get a scramjet working.
Common misconception.
The speed of sound in a gas is affected mainly by temperature... not density or pressure.
From the page you just linked to:
"The speed of sound depends on the state of the gas; more specifically, the square root of the temperature of the gas."
Mach at 35,000 ft is 663mph
Mach at 150,000 ft is 732mph
The reason higher aircraft hit higher mach numbers is due to decreased air resistance... concorde can hit mach at 50,000 ft, but not at 20,000.. not because mach is perceptibly slower, but because there is less drag.
It was?
Who was marketing alphas to the PC market?
A lot of posts are commenting on how fast this is.
Speed is not the point of this experiment.. there have already been a number of aircraft faster than this, much faster.
The point is that, after boosting it to mach 5 with a conventional engine, it was set free for the scramjet to work, and it boosted it another mach or two.. meaning the scramjet worked.
Not having to carry liquid oxygen means you can now carry more fuel, cargo, whatever.