Most automakers usually make 40W per speaker their max for stock audio systems. With higher end systems, they may supply around 50W -- granted they're probably bigger than a single DIN (1.5-2)... it's always hard to tell with so much face plating. I haven't personally seen a 60W stock system yet.
You could easily make a single DIN with 50W or more since there is no depth requirement to meet the DIN specification, or you could just use better amplifying components. GM and Chrysler usually use a 1.5 DIN anyway. Ford usually does single or double DIN (double is more often in "Mazda designs" that I can see).
The energy used is simply the energy required to create the "cancelling" noise, which is electrical and mechanical energy (~=heat).
The "cancelling" noise is basically a phase inverted replica of the incoming noise. It's like total destructive interference on the sound... as much as possible anyway.
In my experience, the combination of an Oracle database, Windows operating system, Unix hardware and an Apache webserver is a bad combination
Good job getting windows to work on "Unix Hardware", I never thought that was possible.
In fact, through our research the last few days, we have found an advisory on the Apache website that states, 'Please note that at this time, Windows support is entirely experimental and is recommended only for experienced users.' The Apache Group does not guarantee that the software will work as documented or even at all.
Research first, then act. Dumbass.
Brady and Barlow said yesterday that employees at some schools were experiencing slowness with the system. But they denied that any school had been unable to use the system for a prolonged period.
That can be from any number of problems. Heavy loads are 1st, but that could stem from incompetence which could explain this whole problem.
Barlow said officials plan to replace Windows with a different operating system.
Well if you're "running" it on "Unix Hardware", then switching won't help since nobody knows what is going on anyway.
"The system has been slow the last couple of days; it's been off and on," Tarason said.
That happens with all systems, no matter what platform if you don't have the right people managing it. (Dupe comment too).
"Instead of the technology helping, it could be a hindrance," Roy said.
Technology is only a tool. I like to think of it as a simple filter or mathematical equation in which if you put crap in, crap will come out. It's not a magic box that makes everything right even if monkeys are pushing the buttons.
Sorry if this came off like a flame, but the article lacks any real information.
But you ARE doing society a favour --- people will know next time that they should not buy GM cars because GM doesn't care enough to produce cars without such problems or to fix the problems in time! GM doesn't have a 'right' to retain its market share, and certainly not if it is culpably releasing and selling known defective cars.
You obviously have never had any sort of engineering job and therefore have no touch on the engineering process, or how to handle design flaws post product launch.
You are advocating a cover-up. The "moral obligation" we have to society is to make sure we don't do cover-ups when it is discovered products have defects.
No, I'm not advocating a cover-up. I'm simply saying that you MUST give the developers a reaction time to 1) actually find the root cause, 2) fix it, 3) make sure it doesn't break anything else. Not doing so would be arrogant, irresponsible, and dangerously ignorant.
If you don't, you knowingly expose a potentially serious flaw in which 95% of the users won't be able to fix themselves or take any protective measure. You have not helped helped society.
Yes, if every computer user out there was a system administrator that read and subscribed to security logs and discussions, then it might work. But, unfortunately... we live in the real world.
Your analogy, even way of thinking is flawed. This isn't about someone's car not working, it's about someone being able to break in or destroy someone's car.
Say the keypad entry for all GM's had a flaw where if you pressed a certain sequence of keys, you can get into any GM vehicle that has keyless entry.
You go to GM and tell them they need a recall. They tell you they need to get with their suppliers, have them redo their software or hardware logic (after months of the engineers pointing the finger), or else you "go public" in which everyone's GM car is no vulnerable to break-ins.
You "go public", yet it obviously won't be as effective as an actual recall since you cannot contact everyone who owns GM affected by this. The exploit grows in popularity in the darker parts of society, and GM cars around the country are now being broken into becuase you thought you were doing society a "favor".
Yes, GM and/or their supplier is at fault, but who's morally at fault for the possible millions of dollars lost just because some guy was self righteous and wanted to tell the public? GM can't go around telling people not to drive their cars, or weld the door shut, or pull the wires from the keyless entry. That's not an acceptable senario to the end user.
There is a moral obligation to protect others in society. That comes before letting everyone know how to break into each others cars. Your scare tactic you want to play on the corporation will only result in even more stressed engineers, longer design turnovers (hence, MS), and more costly products.
If there was just a bad engine part that could break on the cars, then there is no harm. But, if that information can be used by 3rd parties to do harm onto others, then you have the moral obligation not to go letting everyone know.
I, for one, would welcome another appointment like Rehnquist. Whether you agreed with his decisions or not, he was a man who was dedicated to his work.
Last year, federal agencies spent a record $148 creating and storing new secrets for each $1 spent declassifying old secrets.
I guess it costs more money to make paper and write on it than it does to hand out existing documents.
And from the article:
Overall, the government spent $7.2 billion in 2004 stamping 15.6 million documents "top secret," "secret" or "confidential." That almost doubled the 8.6 million new documents classified as recently as 2001.
That's some expensive ink. Maybe they should refill their cartriges... oh wait, that's against the law now.
I have yet to find in the article or any link provided in the summary as to how this magic figure is relevant.
"These numbers show we are going in the wrong direction,"
How do the numbers show this? Why is it the wrong direction? To me, it sounds like a group of people agasint government classification of information just spewing arbitrary facts to their liking, and formulating some sort of conclusion out of it that supports their biased oppinions.
Diamond is a brittle material and is normally not electrically conducting. Nanotubes, on the other hand, are incredibly strong and are also great electrical conductors... a new material is produced that combines the material properties of both diamond and nanotubes.
So we have brittle, less conductive nanotubes? I don't get the advantage here...
Re-read your own sentences. They contradict eachother.
Once again you are a lying ignorant fuck. YAST resolves dependencies for you
This isn't "for you". Any average person seeing this will get confused. Hell, BSD's ports tree resolves dependencies too, but does that make it easy?
That's one of the main reasons Windows is generally easier. The only "dependency" conflicts are dll files which are handled automatically without the user's knowledge.
Are you not familiar with english? What you're trying to say and what you actually say don't match up. How many more times must I show your own contradictions?
This is cruise control. There's an on/off button on your steering wheel. This isn't 1984, it's a modification to cruise control. Do you take sharp bends with cruise control on?
Please realize the actual technology involved and it's intent before making assumptions on how it will affect you.
P.S. Let's just say I work for one of the "Big 3".
"Is that no different than getting an RPM package for Linux off a website that isn't in the package manager already? Linux isn't immune to it."
99.9999999% of linux users don't ever do that. So stop lying.
Jesus christ... will you grow up and make valid, logical arguments? I won't even begin to say what is wrong with your arguments. Look at the number, for god sakes. And after a year, will it have the latest versions? Or am I going to have to hunt that down manually? No, it doesn't have all the packages anyway. Where's the gcc compiler patched for the 68hc11 or avr?
I've used Yast, it's not as one-click as you make it seem. Yes it's free and organized, but that's all I can think of what it has going for it. Do you think the average person is going to know how to solve dependency conflicts, or did you just forget to mention that in your ramblings?
You exagerate on EVERY point that favors your view. You're like a 16 year old child fighting over staying out till 10pm because your parents won't let you. Stop making broad assumptions on everything. Your one standard that you've come across does not cover everything. Other posts have pointed out that *every* installer has it's downfalls.
You're a hypocritical moron who can't tell the difference from words or shit falling out of your mouth. The next argument you make better have some sort of logical base.
If it wasn't slanderous, then what is the problem? People have the right to present their review of any product, or anything.
All the articles I read about it only say he posted a negative comment about the web-search boosting product. Did he lie about it, or was it a fair comment that he made?
Some people will sue others over even looking at them funny. Overall, though, I have my money on Aaron Wall.
You had to search for the software. You had to visit a web site. You had to find the download link. You had to download it. You most likely had to unzip it. You had to do all that before you even start to install it.
Is that no different than getting an RPM package for Linux off a website that isn't in the package manager already? Linux isn't immune to it.
With zipping built into windows XP, you don't really have to "unzip" it since it acts as any old folder. Just go into it and double click to the installer.
Compare that to yast where you click on yast and can browse hundreds of pieces of software and install them with one click. No licenses to agree to either.
How is searching through a few websites or even google different than searching through *hundreds* of pieces of software? The same manual intervention done finding the software online is comparable to the search done in the package manager.
No matter what you do, there's manual work involved. Get over it. Stop counting insignificant clicks.
Good for you. You are a rare creature in windows land. Somebody who never buys any software other then games.
Since when did you have to always go to a store to buy software? You can order it online as well. Steam is designed exactly for that (HL2). Stop lying. Stop skewing the facts. Stop exaggerating. Stop ignoring the downfalls that Linux has while focusing on one possibility in windows. Every single install method requires work on part of the user. Get over it.
"My point is that none of the problems you point out are unsolved; we just need a comprehensive solution that includes all of the available technology."
So there is no one solution. Which is my point exactly.
so, while installing is a sticking point of Linux, it is only very temporarily so.
I agree, installing is a sticking point. That is my whole point. As to how temporary it is, that is undetermined right now.
You say there is a problem, but act as if there is none. Confusing, one might say.
COmpare installing software in windows to linux. In windows you have to buy 99% of your software. This means actually getting in a car and traveling to a store for gods sake.
99% of the software I have installed was downloaded. I double clicked the little icon, then after hitting "next" a few times, the software was installed.
The only thing I go to the store for was a video game.
No it won't. If you read the frekin article, it's simply a front-end avoidance system for cruise control. Nothing more. It doesn't control the steering for you, it simply keeps a defined distance from the car infront.
This was modded up? It has nothing to do with the article!
they need instead to fire up YaST or whatever the equivalent is in your favorite distro and find it that way. (YaST is not a perfect tool; it's just the tool that I'm the most familiar with.) It's a different way to install, but not inherently any more difficult. Have you used yum or apt-get? I know, they're command line, but they resolve dependencies automatically. YaST does too, but it's a little more verbose.
Do you *not* realize that *that* is the problem? Users don't want to dick around learning 5 different ways of obtaining packages, and either installing the binaries through different methods unique to their distro or installing from source. They want a button that says "install", and they're done. Even windows installers are too confusing for numerous people, how the hell are you going to get them to use the command line?
You just don't get it. Your parent's posting is still valid.
Slashdot Mirror
You can play whatever the hell you want.... you just might need someone else to buy it for you.
It's no different than porn, guns, cigars, R-rated movies, etc.
Most automakers usually make 40W per speaker their max for stock audio systems. With higher end systems, they may supply around 50W -- granted they're probably bigger than a single DIN (1.5-2) ... it's always hard to tell with so much face plating. I haven't personally seen a 60W stock system yet.
You could easily make a single DIN with 50W or more since there is no depth requirement to meet the DIN specification, or you could just use better amplifying components. GM and Chrysler usually use a 1.5 DIN anyway. Ford usually does single or double DIN (double is more often in "Mazda designs" that I can see).
The energy used is simply the energy required to create the "cancelling" noise, which is electrical and mechanical energy (~=heat).
The "cancelling" noise is basically a phase inverted replica of the incoming noise. It's like total destructive interference on the sound... as much as possible anyway.
powered gliders
Oxymoron, anyone?
In my experience, the combination of an Oracle database, Windows operating system, Unix hardware and an Apache webserver is a bad combination
Good job getting windows to work on "Unix Hardware", I never thought that was possible.
In fact, through our research the last few days, we have found an advisory on the Apache website that states, 'Please note that at this time, Windows support is entirely experimental and is recommended only for experienced users.' The Apache Group does not guarantee that the software will work as documented or even at all.
Research first, then act. Dumbass.
Brady and Barlow said yesterday that employees at some schools were experiencing slowness with the system. But they denied that any school had been unable to use the system for a prolonged period.
That can be from any number of problems. Heavy loads are 1st, but that could stem from incompetence which could explain this whole problem.
Barlow said officials plan to replace Windows with a different operating system.
Well if you're "running" it on "Unix Hardware", then switching won't help since nobody knows what is going on anyway.
"The system has been slow the last couple of days; it's been off and on," Tarason said.
That happens with all systems, no matter what platform if you don't have the right people managing it. (Dupe comment too).
"Instead of the technology helping, it could be a hindrance," Roy said.
Technology is only a tool. I like to think of it as a simple filter or mathematical equation in which if you put crap in, crap will come out. It's not a magic box that makes everything right even if monkeys are pushing the buttons.
Sorry if this came off like a flame, but the article lacks any real information.
Lynx has had it's problems. You can crash some previous (recent) versions with very large tables. They can be empty tables too like this one.
about:config
network.enableIDN should be on for the exploit to work. Off and you're immune.
Don't know if that's the case for you or not.
For those testing on their own, *please realize* that it is not simply a dash (0x2D), but the character 0xAD.
But you ARE doing society a favour --- people will know next time that they should not buy GM cars because GM doesn't care enough to produce cars without such problems or to fix the problems in time! GM doesn't have a 'right' to retain its market share, and certainly not if it is culpably releasing and selling known defective cars.
You obviously have never had any sort of engineering job and therefore have no touch on the engineering process, or how to handle design flaws post product launch.
You are advocating a cover-up. The "moral obligation" we have to society is to make sure we don't do cover-ups when it is discovered products have defects.
No, I'm not advocating a cover-up. I'm simply saying that you MUST give the developers a reaction time to 1) actually find the root cause, 2) fix it, 3) make sure it doesn't break anything else. Not doing so would be arrogant, irresponsible, and dangerously ignorant.
If you don't, you knowingly expose a potentially serious flaw in which 95% of the users won't be able to fix themselves or take any protective measure. You have not helped helped society.
Yes, if every computer user out there was a system administrator that read and subscribed to security logs and discussions, then it might work. But, unfortunately... we live in the real world.
Your analogy, even way of thinking is flawed. This isn't about someone's car not working, it's about someone being able to break in or destroy someone's car.
Say the keypad entry for all GM's had a flaw where if you pressed a certain sequence of keys, you can get into any GM vehicle that has keyless entry.
You go to GM and tell them they need a recall. They tell you they need to get with their suppliers, have them redo their software or hardware logic (after months of the engineers pointing the finger), or else you "go public" in which everyone's GM car is no vulnerable to break-ins.
You "go public", yet it obviously won't be as effective as an actual recall since you cannot contact everyone who owns GM affected by this. The exploit grows in popularity in the darker parts of society, and GM cars around the country are now being broken into becuase you thought you were doing society a "favor".
Yes, GM and/or their supplier is at fault, but who's morally at fault for the possible millions of dollars lost just because some guy was self righteous and wanted to tell the public? GM can't go around telling people not to drive their cars, or weld the door shut, or pull the wires from the keyless entry. That's not an acceptable senario to the end user.
There is a moral obligation to protect others in society. That comes before letting everyone know how to break into each others cars. Your scare tactic you want to play on the corporation will only result in even more stressed engineers, longer design turnovers (hence, MS), and more costly products.
If there was just a bad engine part that could break on the cars, then there is no harm. But, if that information can be used by 3rd parties to do harm onto others, then you have the moral obligation not to go letting everyone know.
I, for one, would welcome another appointment like Rehnquist. Whether you agreed with his decisions or not, he was a man who was dedicated to his work.
So was Hitler.
Let's try another reason for adornment, shall we?
Last year, federal agencies spent a record $148 creating and storing new secrets for each $1 spent declassifying old secrets.
I guess it costs more money to make paper and write on it than it does to hand out existing documents.
And from the article:
Overall, the government spent $7.2 billion in 2004 stamping 15.6 million documents "top secret," "secret" or "confidential." That almost doubled the 8.6 million new documents classified as recently as 2001.
That's some expensive ink. Maybe they should refill their cartriges... oh wait, that's against the law now.
I have yet to find in the article or any link provided in the summary as to how this magic figure is relevant.
"These numbers show we are going in the wrong direction,"
How do the numbers show this? Why is it the wrong direction? To me, it sounds like a group of people agasint government classification of information just spewing arbitrary facts to their liking, and formulating some sort of conclusion out of it that supports their biased oppinions.
Diamond is a brittle material and is normally not electrically conducting. Nanotubes, on the other hand, are incredibly strong and are also great electrical conductors... a new material is produced that combines the material properties of both diamond and nanotubes.
So we have brittle, less conductive nanotubes? I don't get the advantage here...
100-99.9999999% != .00001%
Re-read your own sentences. They contradict eachother.
Once again you are a lying ignorant fuck. YAST resolves dependencies for you
This isn't "for you". Any average person seeing this will get confused. Hell, BSD's ports tree resolves dependencies too, but does that make it easy?
That's one of the main reasons Windows is generally easier. The only "dependency" conflicts are dll files which are handled automatically without the user's knowledge.
Are you not familiar with english? What you're trying to say and what you actually say don't match up. How many more times must I show your own contradictions?
This is cruise control. There's an on/off button on your steering wheel. This isn't 1984, it's a modification to cruise control. Do you take sharp bends with cruise control on?
Please realize the actual technology involved and it's intent before making assumptions on how it will affect you.
P.S. Let's just say I work for one of the "Big 3".
"Is that no different than getting an RPM package for Linux off a website that isn't in the package manager already? Linux isn't immune to it."
99.9999999% of linux users don't ever do that. So stop lying.
Jesus christ... will you grow up and make valid, logical arguments? I won't even begin to say what is wrong with your arguments. Look at the number, for god sakes. And after a year, will it have the latest versions? Or am I going to have to hunt that down manually? No, it doesn't have all the packages anyway. Where's the gcc compiler patched for the 68hc11 or avr?
I've used Yast, it's not as one-click as you make it seem. Yes it's free and organized, but that's all I can think of what it has going for it. Do you think the average person is going to know how to solve dependency conflicts, or did you just forget to mention that in your ramblings?
You exagerate on EVERY point that favors your view. You're like a 16 year old child fighting over staying out till 10pm because your parents won't let you. Stop making broad assumptions on everything. Your one standard that you've come across does not cover everything. Other posts have pointed out that *every* installer has it's downfalls.
You're a hypocritical moron who can't tell the difference from words or shit falling out of your mouth. The next argument you make better have some sort of logical base.
If it wasn't slanderous, then what is the problem? People have the right to present their review of any product, or anything.
All the articles I read about it only say he posted a negative comment about the web-search boosting product. Did he lie about it, or was it a fair comment that he made?
Some people will sue others over even looking at them funny. Overall, though, I have my money on Aaron Wall.
You had to search for the software. You had to visit a web site. You had to find the download link. You had to download it. You most likely had to unzip it. You had to do all that before you even start to install it.
Is that no different than getting an RPM package for Linux off a website that isn't in the package manager already? Linux isn't immune to it.
With zipping built into windows XP, you don't really have to "unzip" it since it acts as any old folder. Just go into it and double click to the installer.
Compare that to yast where you click on yast and can browse hundreds of pieces of software and install them with one click. No licenses to agree to either.
How is searching through a few websites or even google different than searching through *hundreds* of pieces of software? The same manual intervention done finding the software online is comparable to the search done in the package manager.
No matter what you do, there's manual work involved. Get over it. Stop counting insignificant clicks.
Good for you. You are a rare creature in windows land. Somebody who never buys any software other then games.
Since when did you have to always go to a store to buy software? You can order it online as well. Steam is designed exactly for that (HL2). Stop lying. Stop skewing the facts. Stop exaggerating. Stop ignoring the downfalls that Linux has while focusing on one possibility in windows. Every single install method requires work on part of the user. Get over it.
"My point is that none of the problems you point out are unsolved; we just need a comprehensive solution that includes all of the available technology."
So there is no one solution. Which is my point exactly.
so, while installing is a sticking point of Linux, it is only very temporarily so.
I agree, installing is a sticking point. That is my whole point. As to how temporary it is, that is undetermined right now.
You say there is a problem, but act as if there is none. Confusing, one might say.
I'm lying?
COmpare installing software in windows to linux. In windows you have to buy 99% of your software. This means actually getting in a car and traveling to a store for gods sake.
99% of the software I have installed was downloaded. I double clicked the little icon, then after hitting "next" a few times, the software was installed.
The only thing I go to the store for was a video game.
STOP LYING. Read the post again.
No it won't. If you read the frekin article, it's simply a front-end avoidance system for cruise control. Nothing more. It doesn't control the steering for you, it simply keeps a defined distance from the car infront.
This was modded up? It has nothing to do with the article!
Well, this is slashdot, after all.
they need instead to fire up YaST or whatever the equivalent is in your favorite distro and find it that way. (YaST is not a perfect tool; it's just the tool that I'm the most familiar with.) It's a different way to install, but not inherently any more difficult. Have you used yum or apt-get? I know, they're command line, but they resolve dependencies automatically. YaST does too, but it's a little more verbose.
Do you *not* realize that *that* is the problem? Users don't want to dick around learning 5 different ways of obtaining packages, and either installing the binaries through different methods unique to their distro or installing from source. They want a button that says "install", and they're done. Even windows installers are too confusing for numerous people, how the hell are you going to get them to use the command line?
You just don't get it. Your parent's posting is still valid.
Men know how to make a paragraph break.
So what comes next?
Something more code-efficient than x86?
It's called Grand Theft Auto.