An aircraft that a semi-well off person can keep, in the same line as a bomb shelter.
Tons of survival nuts would love to have a vehicle that, during a disaster of any sort, only needs a long enough stretch of space nearby to get them airborne. If WWIII, zombies, aliens, or whatever might scare the paranoid is coming, few people are going to care whether they take off from a well mowed lawn, or a straight stretch of nearby road. Regulations be damned, they'll be airborne.
Many of these events don't leave enough time for someone to even get to an airport. However, a plane in your garage?
I'm Canadian, but I pay attention to US politics from time to time.
I don't think it's quite fair to state that Obama didn't take action. He did. However, the first *big* change he advocated during the election, Health Care Reform, was quite effectively blocked. He's spent years on that, and years fighting to prevent a reversal for the meager changes he could push through.
It isn't like Obama can wave a magic wand, and make change. It isn't like any president can. He did what he could, he brought forward the idea of change. He spearheaded change. Many attempted to block that change, including many Democrats.
I'm all for pointing out flaws, but at least point at the right flaws.
An alternative example, was during first few weeks of a Conservative government up here. They canceled the national day care program. Many people were upset by this, which is fine, but people claimed Harper was a 'bad leader' for doing so.
Ur, bad leader? He *campaigned" on abolishment of that program, and was democratically elected. If he *hadn't* canceled that program, he'd have been a bad leader! He'd have *lied*.
So, I guess what I'm saying is -- is sounds to me like health care reform was an attempt at massive change -- that failed through no fault of Obama's. So, what are you blaming him for, exactly?
Good grief. For the last 50 years, food production has increased faster than population. Further, over 1/2 our current food just rots, and where I live (and many G8 countries), 1/2 the farmland is fallow. That doesn't even include the farmland that is now under concrete.
What have *no* problem at all, with food production. The world population could be 50 billion, and we wouldn't even have to stop eating meat, in order to feed ourselves.
Any statements about 'up to date' software immediately shows a glaring lack of comprehension about code stability.
Debian is only behind, if you like to use beta quality software. People with server farms, managing large quantities of data, don't WANT the latest and greatest, they want STABILITY. Stability is thousands, yes thousands of times more important than new features in code.
Gentoo has its place. However, that place is not anywhere near a data center, not anywhere near a corporate office, not anywhere near a server farm. Anyone with any competence in the real world won't use Gentoo for serious work, for the reasons listed above. Frankly, if you show me a resume with the word "Gentoo" on it, you're not going to get hired.
Gentoo's very nature ensures that it will *ALWAYS* be a BETA or even ALPHA quality build product. That's not because it's compiled from source, that's because of the way Gentoo manages packages, and because of a dozen different things that are in other projects to work towards stability. Gentoo seems to think that nothing is more important than the latest and greatest.. and as a result....
Well... instability is what you get.
(before people get all silly about this, that doesn't mean Gentoo doesn't have its place. However, stop trying to tell me that a home-built car should be deemed street worthy -- without even having to abide by the current legislation for street worth cars!)
(Lastly -- comments from the above post, such as "We could increase stabilization times but software would be available in a less timely manner..." and "Gentoo developers don't maintain code, they maintain software packages." and "but most of the times are either bad decisions from upstream developers or because a major change (which breaks stuff) is really needed." shows how stability is the last thing on a Gentoo package maintainer's mind...)
I don't recall saying YOUR project equated to 10 hours of graphic design, and 10 hours of other work, did I?
I've seen company sites in Drupal and Joomla, that literally took that long, where hosting was extra, where even fixing BUGS was extra, and the bill was $50k+.
If you're not one of those people, good for you! However, why would you respond?!
I would agree, except that 'rational police departments' were LIED to, and told that tasers were safe, harmless things! There were countless studies, reports, and so forth indicating it was so.
The sad part is that there *are* good consultants out there. I'm one of them. I'm extremely skilled, knowledgeable, and I bring a lot to the table.
...but that's what they all say.
Perhaps, but now you're slinging mud.
The truth is, as with any profession, there are a lot of incompetent people out there. Frankly, I've seen a lot of incompetence in the IT world, including full time employees.
I find it astounding that some consultants charge for lunch, and even charge for taking a crap. If I stop and have a 10 minute discussion, non-work related, with someone at a firm I'm working for... I *take that time off the bill*. I don't charge for research, unless the topic is utterly obscure. You're paying for expertise, so why would you pay for research time?!
I bill at $90 per hour, whereas my full time peers generally earn about 1/2 that. Considering I'm not (here, in Canada) covered by employment insurance, that I don't bill for lunch, breaks and other things employees do, it's actually quite the favourable deal.
What do I get out of it, then? The option to work where I choose, when I choose, and with variety you do not normally get from a full time job. One day I'll be working with EDA software, the next with Geometrics. It prevents me from getting into a groove. Most good admins I know, constantly fine-tune systems, script for many issues, and as a result the job becomes easier to maintain. That gets a bit boring, however. I prefer to constantly be challenged.
The sad part is that there *are* good consultants out there. I'm one of them. I'm extremely skilled, knowledgeable, and I bring a lot to the table.
Frankly, there are a *lot* of firms out there that have unskilled admins, that only need help during certain projects, or during time of distress. As well, as long as the person doing the audit is acceptable, external security audits are a GOOD thing. If one truly cares about security (and not ego), external audits are great. Lastly, there are firms that are too small to really staff a full time admin, and can use a consultant for 5 hours per day, or per week, or for some -- 5 hours per month!
However, I know precisely what you are talking about, when you complain about consultants. I've seen so many incompetent consultants, and I've seen even more greedy ones. As an example, I've seen consultant firms offer *less*, and charge literally 4 times the price that I do. Said firm had a consultant who was touted as an 'expert', yet was a roofer 6 months earlier, and hadn't even used a command line before then.
The worst of the worst, from what I've seen, are web design firms. I can't even imagine how they get off charging $50k, for drupal/joomla installs, with about 10 hours of graphic design, and about 10 hours of followup work. It is utterly bizarre!
I'll say again, the ONLY time a taser should be used, is when an officer would use a handgun instead.
I disagree. An officer should ONLY use a handgun when the suspect is pointing a handgun at an innocent person. Tasers need to be more versatile than that. But I do agree with the general principle that Tasers should not be used as frequently as they are. But I would also like to point out that nearly every incident of improper (and often proper on a slow news day) garners tons of media attention, making a lot of people think that Tasers are misused a lot more often than they are. Your average police officer is not ever going to consider wielding his Taser against someone who's being 'lippy' during a traffic stop.
I disagree with your disagreement.;P
Seriously, however, there are reasonable times for an officer to use a gun, outside of what you've listed above. For example, when it is reasonable that the officer was threatened in a manner warranting it. EG.. one officer, two large assailants, refusals to back down by the same assailants, etc.
Or, officer is a 5'2, 100lb woman (we have those here), and she is being approached by a 6'2, 250lb man.
So, when I look at it in that context, I think that tasers should only be used, when an officer would pull a gun, too. That is, there is reason to expect that a physical confrontation may go very wrong for the officer... and the officer has attempted to defuse the situation otherwise.
The problem is that almost every police force in the world uses tasers *improperly*.
This is because of the lobbying, and the lies, all claiming that tasers are not dangerous. As a result, police do not assume there are risks with tasers. They use them indiscriminately, and in fact, many forces use them instead of physical restraint!
Five RCMP officers, and a slightly agitated man... tasered TO DEATH. Hell, one of those officers, with their training, should have been able to 'take down' that man.
I've seen videos of people with traffic violations, who are perhaps a bit 'lippy' to police, being tasered. Absurd. That is the real issue. That is why the public dislikes tasers.
Tasers need to be labelled a dangerous weapon. They should only be used when an officer would normally use a gun. I'll say again, the ONLY time a taser should be used, is when an officer would use a handgun instead.
And movie stars don't make extra cash, above the last movie they made?
What about baseball players? Do they make extra cash selling commercial products?
What about authors? How about GRR Martin? Write a nice fantasy book, and make extra cash off of appearances, TV spin offs, board games?
Frankly, I think the President should be making > $10M per year. I think Senators and Congressmen should be making half that.
Can you explain to me how else we'd go about hiring competent people away from other fields -- where their dedication and hard work pay them far more than that?
Sure, you can point to the brownouts. Movie stars that fall into drugs and eventually end up self destructing. The same for any other profession. However, outside of these failures, as an example, these people work HARD. Ever try being a lead role in a Hollywood production? A TV show? You think they work short hours? Aren't dedicated?
How about the constant, CONSTANT training people do for major league sports?
Frankly, people that think politicians should be making $40k per year are likely the most lazy, self-centered, hedonistic people out there. If you are intelligent, and hard working in the US -- you can be rich if you WANT it. Not sort of want it. Not wishing for it while you watch 4 hours of TV a night, or spend 8 hours looking at internet porn -- or smoking dope all day, or getting drunk every night.
No, if you WANT it, you can HAVE it... and those are the people we WANT to attract to politics. Pay people $10M to be president, and the ambitious will be happy to work for that wage, without any extras.
If you want quality talent, and people more difficult to bribe/influence, you MUST pay them well.
What's the average CEO's pay? What's the average salary in any national sports league? What about a successful TV star? Movie star? Race car driver? Author? Put another way, what's the average salary for someone that made it to the TOP of their career?
A federal politician is just that -- at the top of their career chain. You get more for running committees, you get even more if you're the President.
Frankly, I think some of these people are *under* paid. Does the president make any where near what the #1, top billed movie star make? What was the top paid baseball player paid last year? Who makes more -- the top of the largest corporation in the US, or the President?
People need to be paid in line with comparables!
It really annoys me when I see people working on assembly lines, or front line jobs, complaining that their salary isn't any where near what some politician's is. How about this... work your ass off, clearly be extremely skilled in your field, have a *goal* to make the big bucks,and don't make mistakes that might derail you -- and then complain to me if you don't make it.
Your brother destroyed his clutch for some other reason, but most certainly it had nothing to do with the beach. I've grown up on dirt roads, and beaches my entire life. 90% of my driving has been on dirt/sand, and a considerable amount on beaches.
I'm not even sure why you think one would need special tires, weights in the trunk, and so on. I've driven all manner of car, from absolute crapbox to turbos in these environments. I've had bald tires, winter tires, performance tires, and all season tires on these cars. I watched that segment, and that dirt track was very hard packed and smooth, no potholes and/or rocks, frankly I prefer that over pavement!
Volkswagen never had better build quality. They're alright but nothing special. I would equate them with about the same quality as Dodge. Ford, Chevy, BMW were always a little better and about the same to each other (I own vehicles from all three plus VW).
For top build quality you have to go to Honda, Toyota, etc. (I have never owned any of these but know lots of people who do)
VW most certainly *had* better build quality. I can tell you that the VWs of the early 80s were incredible. Tough bastards.
Meanwhile, Fords would fall apart if you looked at them wrong.
That's changed now, of course. I certainly place Ford well above VW in terms of build quality now. However, back in the early 80s, I'd place VW up there with Toyota, hands down.
I think you fail to understand what a differential does. These cars absolutely have a "hardware" differential. What they do not have is a locking differential. Almost no vehicles have locking differentials except vehicles intended for severe off-road conditions or racing vehicles. The reason is, locking differentials are clunky as hell, and most people would never understand how or why they work and complain when they locked up in turns.
Every car I've owned, except for my last two VWs (EOS 2.0T and Jetta 2.0T) have had a limited slip. (Sorry for saying 'none', I mean 'open').
Certainly, all of my previous VWs had them... including a Rabbit of all things.
They have a "hardware differential", but it's a purely-open differential. You're thinking of a limited-slip differential.
Quite. I should have stipulated 'open' not 'none'. It is simply that in my mind, when I first learned of diffs when I was a youngin', the limited slip was what was discussed. Just a mental fart.
If I were engineering a moderately-priced medium-performance car, I probably wouldn't put one in either due to cost and weight concerns. For that type of application, using the stability control/braking system to implement LSD functionality is a better trade-off, IMHO.
The only reason I can really see for using a true LSD or locking differential anymore is either in very high performance situations or in very low traction off-road/rock-crawling situations. Otherwise, intelligent application of the brakes to stop spinning wheels is IMHO a better compromise.
It certainly isn't as efficient as a true limited slip, I can attest to that.
I have absolutely no issue replacing hardware with electronics + hardware at a discounted price, as long as the result is the same. Here's an awesome example of just that:
I owned a 2007 VW Jetta 2.0T, and I now own an EOS. Both have the above, and while there are minor issues, I do find this tradeoff acceptable. It certainly provides for power failure, it isn't drive by wire, but at the same time it provides for fuel savings, less load on the engine, and a cheaper cost.
That's something I can live with.
EDL though? In a $40k+ car? In cars designed for performance (2.0T cars with 'racing suspension' (marketing term))?
Most certainly, such a car should not have issues getting out of steep gravel driveways, due to EDL. I also don't like how, under heavy acceleration, the entire steering wheel jerks violently as the power shifts back and forth between the two drive wheels. EDL doesn't work above 40km/hr (or so, not sure of the precise speed it necessarily shuts off at).
Also, I think that Ford has beaten VW in build quality/hardiness for at least a decade, at least in the North American market.
Well, I won't disagree, as my Ford experience is from the 80s, and from now... so I can't attest to the last 10 years. I will certainly agree that they seem to be right on their game now, and in the 80s -- horrid, HORRID product. So, they've done a 180 as far as I'm concerned...
I might add, just because I have to (my angst and anger requires it). You've just described Volkswagen.
Prime example: most modern Volks don't even have a real hardware differential. Do you really think any engineer would ever design a car that way?
Yes, there is EDL (electronic differential lock). It is absolutely not the same as a real diff. I've seen people unable to get out of a steep grade, gravel driveway, because of EDL.
Pfft. EDL is only one example of the sadness of modern VW. I'm not going to say it's all bad ; hell, I still drive one.. and love it. However, when Ford has caught up to the same build quality / hardiness of VW, that shows something.
You know, 25 years ago I managed to get a hold of a teacher's grade book. I modified my mark on one test, just because I was annoyed at having an overall average under 90%.
(We didn't have A or C grades, nor GPA... just a mean average of all tests in the year. 85% right, 97% right, etc)
Funny thing is, first -- he did not notice until a friend of mine kept saying 'doesn't that 8 look weird?' to the teacher.;) It was all good fun, in that, we could not believe he had not noticed.
However, the downside was -- woha, the mark I changed were zeroed out. He felt that was punishment enough, in that, I had moved from 87% to 83% in terms of my new average.
How the *hell* does any of this result in criminal charges. My *god*, these are *kids*. Criminal charges?! Teenagers do *stupid* things. They do them on the spur of the moment. Punishment is required so one can learn that there are repercussions, but come on!
Suspend them for a week, if you must. Force them to donate the money to charity, or some such. Zero out all the grades they changed, if you must.
Slashdot Mirror
How about the end of an era for a father?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZqPQPhsuX4
For an idea of what it is like to experience this bug, watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZqPQPhsuX4
I bet there is another angle for this too.
An aircraft that a semi-well off person can keep, in the same line as a bomb shelter.
Tons of survival nuts would love to have a vehicle that, during a disaster of any sort, only needs a long enough stretch of space nearby to get them airborne. If WWIII, zombies, aliens, or whatever might scare the paranoid is coming, few people are going to care whether they take off from a well mowed lawn, or a straight stretch of nearby road. Regulations be damned, they'll be airborne.
Many of these events don't leave enough time for someone to even get to an airport. However, a plane in your garage?
I'm Canadian, but I pay attention to US politics from time to time.
I don't think it's quite fair to state that Obama didn't take action. He did. However, the first *big* change he advocated during the election, Health Care Reform, was quite effectively blocked. He's spent years on that, and years fighting to prevent a reversal for the meager changes he could push through.
It isn't like Obama can wave a magic wand, and make change. It isn't like any president can. He did what he could, he brought forward the idea of change. He spearheaded change. Many attempted to block that change, including many Democrats.
I'm all for pointing out flaws, but at least point at the right flaws.
An alternative example, was during first few weeks of a Conservative government up here. They canceled the national day care program. Many people were upset by this, which is fine, but people claimed Harper was a 'bad leader' for doing so.
Ur, bad leader? He *campaigned" on abolishment of that program, and was democratically elected. If he *hadn't* canceled that program, he'd have been a bad leader! He'd have *lied*.
So, I guess what I'm saying is -- is sounds to me like health care reform was an attempt at massive change -- that failed through no fault of Obama's. So, what are you blaming him for, exactly?
Good grief. For the last 50 years, food production has increased faster than population. Further, over 1/2 our current food just rots, and where I live (and many G8 countries), 1/2 the farmland is fallow. That doesn't even include the farmland that is now under concrete.
What have *no* problem at all, with food production. The world population could be 50 billion, and we wouldn't even have to stop eating meat, in order to feed ourselves.
Bah.
Any statements about 'up to date' software immediately shows a glaring lack of comprehension about code stability.
Debian is only behind, if you like to use beta quality software. People with server farms, managing large quantities of data, don't WANT the latest and greatest, they want STABILITY. Stability is thousands, yes thousands of times more important than new features in code.
Gentoo has its place. However, that place is not anywhere near a data center, not anywhere near a corporate office, not anywhere near a server farm. Anyone with any competence in the real world won't use Gentoo for serious work, for the reasons listed above. Frankly, if you show me a resume with the word "Gentoo" on it, you're not going to get hired.
Gentoo's very nature ensures that it will *ALWAYS* be a BETA or even ALPHA quality build product. That's not because it's compiled from source, that's because of the way Gentoo manages packages, and because of a dozen different things that are in other projects to work towards stability. Gentoo seems to think that nothing is more important than the latest and greatest.. and as a result....
Well... instability is what you get.
(before people get all silly about this, that doesn't mean Gentoo doesn't have its place. However, stop trying to tell me that a home-built car should be deemed street worthy -- without even having to abide by the current legislation for street worth cars!)
(Lastly -- comments from the above post, such as "We could increase stabilization times but software would be available in a less timely manner..." and "Gentoo developers don't maintain code, they maintain software packages." and "but most of the times are either bad decisions from upstream developers or because a major change (which breaks stuff) is really needed." shows how stability is the last thing on a Gentoo package maintainer's mind...)
There'd better not have been a single voicemail in the "national security" category! The idea is absurd!
I don't recall saying YOUR project equated to 10 hours of graphic design, and 10 hours of other work, did I?
I've seen company sites in Drupal and Joomla, that literally took that long, where hosting was extra, where even fixing BUGS was extra, and the bill was $50k+.
If you're not one of those people, good for you! However, why would you respond?!
I would agree, except that 'rational police departments' were LIED to, and told that tasers were safe, harmless things! There were countless studies, reports, and so forth indicating it was so.
So, don't blame them.. blame the LIARS.
The sad part is that there *are* good consultants out there. I'm one of them. I'm extremely skilled, knowledgeable, and I bring a lot to the table.
...but that's what they all say.
Perhaps, but now you're slinging mud.
The truth is, as with any profession, there are a lot of incompetent people out there. Frankly, I've seen a lot of incompetence in the IT world, including full time employees.
I find it astounding that some consultants charge for lunch, and even charge for taking a crap. If I stop and have a 10 minute discussion, non-work related, with someone at a firm I'm working for... I *take that time off the bill*. I don't charge for research, unless the topic is utterly obscure. You're paying for expertise, so why would you pay for research time?!
I bill at $90 per hour, whereas my full time peers generally earn about 1/2 that. Considering I'm not (here, in Canada) covered by employment insurance, that I don't bill for lunch, breaks and other things employees do, it's actually quite the favourable deal.
What do I get out of it, then? The option to work where I choose, when I choose, and with variety you do not normally get from a full time job. One day I'll be working with EDA software, the next with Geometrics. It prevents me from getting into a groove. Most good admins I know, constantly fine-tune systems, script for many issues, and as a result the job becomes easier to maintain. That gets a bit boring, however. I prefer to constantly be challenged.
Ah well, to each their own.
The sad part is that there *are* good consultants out there. I'm one of them. I'm extremely skilled, knowledgeable, and I bring a lot to the table.
Frankly, there are a *lot* of firms out there that have unskilled admins, that only need help during certain projects, or during time of distress. As well, as long as the person doing the audit is acceptable, external security audits are a GOOD thing. If one truly cares about security (and not ego), external audits are great. Lastly, there are firms that are too small to really staff a full time admin, and can use a consultant for 5 hours per day, or per week, or for some -- 5 hours per month!
However, I know precisely what you are talking about, when you complain about consultants. I've seen so many incompetent consultants, and I've seen even more greedy ones. As an example, I've seen consultant firms offer *less*, and charge literally 4 times the price that I do. Said firm had a consultant who was touted as an 'expert', yet was a roofer 6 months earlier, and hadn't even used a command line before then.
The worst of the worst, from what I've seen, are web design firms. I can't even imagine how they get off charging $50k, for drupal/joomla installs, with about 10 hours of graphic design, and about 10 hours of followup work. It is utterly bizarre!
I'll say again, the ONLY time a taser should be used, is when an officer would use a handgun instead.
I disagree. An officer should ONLY use a handgun when the suspect is pointing a handgun at an innocent person. Tasers need to be more versatile than that. But I do agree with the general principle that Tasers should not be used as frequently as they are. But I would also like to point out that nearly every incident of improper (and often proper on a slow news day) garners tons of media attention, making a lot of people think that Tasers are misused a lot more often than they are. Your average police officer is not ever going to consider wielding his Taser against someone who's being 'lippy' during a traffic stop.
I disagree with your disagreement. ;P
Seriously, however, there are reasonable times for an officer to use a gun, outside of what you've listed above. For example, when it is reasonable that the officer was threatened in a manner warranting it. EG .. one officer, two large assailants, refusals to back down by the same assailants, etc.
Or, officer is a 5'2, 100lb woman (we have those here), and she is being approached by a 6'2, 250lb man.
So, when I look at it in that context, I think that tasers should only be used, when an officer would pull a gun, too. That is, there is reason to expect that a physical confrontation may go very wrong for the officer... and the officer has attempted to defuse the situation otherwise.
Bah.
The problem is that almost every police force in the world uses tasers *improperly*.
This is because of the lobbying, and the lies, all claiming that tasers are not dangerous. As a result, police do not assume there are risks with tasers. They use them indiscriminately, and in fact, many forces use them instead of physical restraint!
For example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Dzieka%C5%84ski_Taser_incident
Five RCMP officers, and a slightly agitated man... tasered TO DEATH. Hell, one of those officers, with their training, should have been able to 'take down' that man.
I've seen videos of people with traffic violations, who are perhaps a bit 'lippy' to police, being tasered. Absurd. That is the real issue. That is why the public dislikes tasers.
Tasers need to be labelled a dangerous weapon. They should only be used when an officer would normally use a gun. I'll say again, the ONLY time a taser should be used, is when an officer would use a handgun instead.
And movie stars don't make extra cash, above the last movie they made?
What about baseball players? Do they make extra cash selling commercial products?
What about authors? How about GRR Martin? Write a nice fantasy book, and make extra cash off of appearances, TV spin offs, board games?
Frankly, I think the President should be making > $10M per year. I think Senators and Congressmen should be making half that.
Can you explain to me how else we'd go about hiring competent people away from other fields -- where their dedication and hard work pay them far more than that?
Sure, you can point to the brownouts. Movie stars that fall into drugs and eventually end up self destructing. The same for any other profession. However, outside of these failures, as an example, these people work HARD. Ever try being a lead role in a Hollywood production? A TV show? You think they work short hours? Aren't dedicated?
How about the constant, CONSTANT training people do for major league sports?
Frankly, people that think politicians should be making $40k per year are likely the most lazy, self-centered, hedonistic people out there. If you are intelligent, and hard working in the US -- you can be rich if you WANT it. Not sort of want it. Not wishing for it while you watch 4 hours of TV a night, or spend 8 hours looking at internet porn -- or smoking dope all day, or getting drunk every night.
No, if you WANT it, you can HAVE it... and those are the people we WANT to attract to politics. Pay people $10M to be president, and the ambitious will be happy to work for that wage, without any extras.
Listen.
If you want quality talent, and people more difficult to bribe/influence, you MUST pay them well.
What's the average CEO's pay? What's the average salary in any national sports league? What about a successful TV star? Movie star? Race car driver? Author? Put another way, what's the average salary for someone that made it to the TOP of their career?
A federal politician is just that -- at the top of their career chain. You get more for running committees, you get even more if you're the President.
Frankly, I think some of these people are *under* paid. Does the president make any where near what the #1, top billed movie star make? What was the top paid baseball player paid last year? Who makes more -- the top of the largest corporation in the US, or the President?
People need to be paid in line with comparables!
It really annoys me when I see people working on assembly lines, or front line jobs, complaining that their salary isn't any where near what some politician's is. How about this ... work your ass off, clearly be extremely skilled in your field, have a *goal* to make the big bucks,and don't make mistakes that might derail you -- and then complain to me if you don't make it.
I'm sorry, but no. Heh, no.
Your brother destroyed his clutch for some other reason, but most certainly it had nothing to do with the beach. I've grown up on dirt roads, and beaches my entire life. 90% of my driving has been on dirt/sand, and a considerable amount on beaches.
I'm not even sure why you think one would need special tires, weights in the trunk, and so on. I've driven all manner of car, from absolute crapbox to turbos in these environments. I've had bald tires, winter tires, performance tires, and all season tires on these cars. I watched that segment, and that dirt track was very hard packed and smooth, no potholes and/or rocks, frankly I prefer that over pavement!
It makes sense that the series is different, as all the writers are different.
The new writers just don't 'get' it. They misunderstand what was funny about the series.
An example would be the most recent Christmas episode. It was so full of Futurama cliches, and so full of BS, that I had to turn it off...
Volkswagen never had better build quality. They're alright but nothing special. I would equate them with about the same quality as Dodge. Ford, Chevy, BMW were always a little better and about the same to each other (I own vehicles from all three plus VW).
For top build quality you have to go to Honda, Toyota, etc. (I have never owned any of these but know lots of people who do)
VW most certainly *had* better build quality. I can tell you that the VWs of the early 80s were incredible. Tough bastards.
Meanwhile, Fords would fall apart if you looked at them wrong.
That's changed now, of course. I certainly place Ford well above VW in terms of build quality now. However, back in the early 80s, I'd place VW up there with Toyota, hands down.
I think you fail to understand what a differential does. These cars absolutely have a "hardware" differential. What they do not have is a locking differential. Almost no vehicles have locking differentials except vehicles intended for severe off-road conditions or racing vehicles. The reason is, locking differentials are clunky as hell, and most people would never understand how or why they work and complain when they locked up in turns.
Every car I've owned, except for my last two VWs (EOS 2.0T and Jetta 2.0T) have had a limited slip. (Sorry for saying 'none', I mean 'open').
Certainly, all of my previous VWs had them... including a Rabbit of all things.
They have a "hardware differential", but it's a purely-open differential. You're thinking of a limited-slip differential.
Quite. I should have stipulated 'open' not 'none'. It is simply that in my mind, when I first learned of diffs when I was a youngin', the limited slip was what was discussed. Just a mental fart.
If I were engineering a moderately-priced medium-performance car, I probably wouldn't put one in either due to cost and weight concerns. For that type of application, using the stability control/braking system to implement LSD functionality is a better trade-off, IMHO.
The only reason I can really see for using a true LSD or locking differential anymore is either in very high performance situations or in very low traction off-road/rock-crawling situations. Otherwise, intelligent application of the brakes to stop spinning wheels is IMHO a better compromise.
It certainly isn't as efficient as a true limited slip, I can attest to that.
I have absolutely no issue replacing hardware with electronics + hardware at a discounted price, as long as the result is the same. Here's an awesome example of just that:
http://vps.l8r.net/Electro-Mechanical_Power_Steering.pdf
I owned a 2007 VW Jetta 2.0T, and I now own an EOS. Both have the above, and while there are minor issues, I do find this tradeoff acceptable. It certainly provides for power failure, it isn't drive by wire, but at the same time it provides for fuel savings, less load on the engine, and a cheaper cost.
That's something I can live with.
EDL though? In a $40k+ car? In cars designed for performance (2.0T cars with 'racing suspension' (marketing term))?
Most certainly, such a car should not have issues getting out of steep gravel driveways, due to EDL. I also don't like how, under heavy acceleration, the entire steering wheel jerks violently as the power shifts back and forth between the two drive wheels. EDL doesn't work above 40km/hr (or so, not sure of the precise speed it necessarily shuts off at).
Also, I think that Ford has beaten VW in build quality/hardiness for at least a decade, at least in the North American market.
Well, I won't disagree, as my Ford experience is from the 80s, and from now... so I can't attest to the last 10 years. I will certainly agree that they seem to be right on their game now, and in the 80s -- horrid, HORRID product. So, they've done a 180 as far as I'm concerned...
And frankly, so has VW.
I might add, just because I have to (my angst and anger requires it). You've just described Volkswagen.
Prime example: most modern Volks don't even have a real hardware differential. Do you really think any engineer would ever design a car that way?
Yes, there is EDL (electronic differential lock). It is absolutely not the same as a real diff. I've seen people unable to get out of a steep grade, gravel driveway, because of EDL.
Pfft. EDL is only one example of the sadness of modern VW. I'm not going to say it's all bad ; hell, I still drive one.. and love it. However, when Ford has caught up to the same build quality / hardiness of VW, that shows something.
The non-gender specific pronoun is male, in the english language.
Like it or not, that's the way it is.
The only other option, would be for me to say "Hope *it* made it".
I can't believe no one has commented on the guy in the car, turning around on the road, and trying to get away! Hope he made it. :(
When I grew up, a week's suspension would be no such thing. Not once your parents found out (and they would).
In fact, the school's response was mostly there to elicit a response from the parents....
You know, 25 years ago I managed to get a hold of a teacher's grade book. I modified my mark on one test, just because I was annoyed at having an overall average under 90%.
(We didn't have A or C grades, nor GPA... just a mean average of all tests in the year. 85% right, 97% right, etc)
Funny thing is, first -- he did not notice until a friend of mine kept saying 'doesn't that 8 look weird?' to the teacher. ;) It was all good fun, in that, we could not believe he had not noticed.
However, the downside was -- woha, the mark I changed were zeroed out. He felt that was punishment enough, in that, I had moved from 87% to 83% in terms of my new average.
How the *hell* does any of this result in criminal charges. My *god*, these are *kids*. Criminal charges?! Teenagers do *stupid* things. They do them on the spur of the moment. Punishment is required so one can learn that there are repercussions, but come on!
Suspend them for a week, if you must. Force them to donate the money to charity, or some such. Zero out all the grades they changed, if you must.
Call the police?! What is *wrong* with people?!