"retard=> later ignition"... you're changing the point at which the cam opens the valves in relation to the piston movement, and via the computer no less.
Ok, I think you're talking specifically about variable-valve timing engines, eg Honda VTEC probably being one of the best known. I've no idea what kind of adjustibility these systems have via ECU (VTEC seems not be terribly adjustible) - bike engines tend not to have variable-valve timing, too much dead weight:). These chips tend to have most effect by changing the fuel and ignition maps. (given that variable valve timing is not that wide spread, yet)
(eg the example in the news article referred to a VW TDI - which doesnt have variable valve timing).
"retard=> later ignition"... you're changing the point at which the cam opens the valves in relation to the piston movement, and via the computer no less.
Well, if you'd like me to correct you again?:)
You clearly seem to not be appreciating the fact that the cam is a hard, fixed, physical lump of _metal_. It can _not_ be changed in the vast, vast majority of cars. (there are a few high-end engines with mildly adjustable cam timing). The cam controls when the _valves_ are lifted, and for how long. Neither cams, nor valves , nor the timing thereof have anything to do with ignition, least not immediately, and the term "retard" in engine tuning almost always refers to ignition timing.
Ignition, and the advance or retardation of it is controlled by when the spark plug fires, which is _is_ controlled by the ECU.
You're mixing up valve timing, which is nearly always fixed and can not (generally) be changed without major work, often involving replacement of aforementioned physical bits of metal (ie camshaft), with ignition as done by the spark plugs, which _is_ variable and controllable by the ECU.
almost all chips require the use of a higher octane rating and take advantage of the extra power it gives you. (via the retard on the cam)
"via the retard on the cam"? That means _nothing_. And yes, you might to need use higher octane fuel, and _NO_ the extra power had _nothing_ to do with the fuel. The higher octane fuel is required to prevent the engine blowing itself up. Higher octane fuel is merely more resistant to detonation, that is the definition of the octane rating. It does not release extra energy.
you sound book smart but experience short.
Yeah, possibly, I stick to the easy stuff, maintenance and basic tuning. Major stuff I go to my tuner. However, I have a funny feeling I have more experience than you:)
Re:Magnusson Moss Warranty Act
on
Hack Your Car
·
· Score: 1
While you may be able to reprogram the chip back to factory specs before you get it repaired it's still illegal and immoral.
Illegal? Immoral? What planet do you live on?
There are _many_ engine tuning shops which'd be very suprised to find out their busineses are illegal. While, yes, these modified ECUs could indeed kill your engine, it is in the interests of the businesses which sell them to try make sure they dont, or these businesses will not be around for long. Also, many of these chips will be reviewed by car magazines. While not as safe a bet as the original ECU in your car, for those who want the extra (few) horsepower, sure let them, why not? And do you not think that people have been tinkering and modifying engines _long_ before ECUs existed?
Immoral, How on earth do you justify this?
Passing off a car that has been chipped most of its life as standard may well be, but lets face it buying second-hand cars has _long_ been a minefield of potential rip-offs, way way before cars ever had ECUs in the first place. There's just a tonne of ways to get stung when buying a car, formerly chipped car, being just a new, and actually more minor, way. It's the seller who is immoral, if he makes the car out to be something it is not.
Yes, I'm sure the engineers that work for the major auto manufacturers were a tad lazy when tuning the chips for optimum efficiency and safety.
Right, while I agree with the gist of your post, what the hell does safety have to do with it? There's a whole bunch of posters to this story painting this as a safety issue. How?
It simply is not. If it goes wrong, car breaks, ECU-modder gets to pull over and pay even more money for what is potentially a seriously damaged engine. I really dont see the safety angle here..
Wait, I've got it: In some very rare cases, an engine might bust a crankcase and spill oil on the road and hence cause a safety issue. However, lorries and vans and other badly maintained vehicles _regularly_ spill oil and diesel on the roads, so..
Re:Quality Control of hacked code?
on
Hack Your Car
·
· Score: 1
Primarily they are changing the amount af retardation on the cam to allow more or less fuel to optimise the mixture...
What kind of gibberish is that?
A cam is a physical, fixed, lump of metal, physically affixed to a shaft. You cant tweak that via an ECU.
You can however, via the ECU, change the ignition advance - the point before TDC on the compression stroke at which the spark plug fires, advance => earlier ignition, retard => later ignition, and change the fuel/air ratio. A stock ECU might indeed be conservative and run the mixture slightly richer (and too lean at certain RPMs known to be used for emissions testing), and ignition slightly retarded to what is optimum for the compression ratio of the engine and the lowest octane fuel in use. However, there isnt really _that_ much performance you can gain from just engine management changes, you really need to change the physical characteristics of the engine in order to make any significant gains in power and actually maintain reliability.
Higher octane fuel btw, does not do _anything_ for performance in itself. If you have an engine built to run reliably on 92RON octane fuel, pouring 100RON into it wont make any difference. Higher octane fuel simply allows an engine to be tuned further, Eg modifying your ECU to run leaner and/or with higher advance might well require using higher octane fuel or reliability _could_ be affected.
I just wish now that *someone* would release a version of fedora core that includes support for mp3 and various popular video formats so that it would make a usable desktop for most people out of the box. What's to stop someone from releasing ISOs of feature-overloaded-fedora....
The law perhaps? MP3 is patented and players must be licenced and a royalty fee paid. Video: Fedora includes at least one MPEG player. For other formats you most likely need to use Windows DLLs, not freely redistributable, so they cant go into Fedora obviously. Some players provide the ability to link to DVD CSS libraries and hence redistribution is legally impossible it seems.
RedHat cant redistribute these, nor can they even tell users where to go to find these types of players in some cases. This isnt RedHat's fault, it is the legal advice they have gotten and which they must follow. The only way to fix it is to fix the dumb laws which are in place, hence which RedHat must adhere to.
Your time would be far better spent complaining to your Senator, if you are in the US, than complaining on/..
Isn't pulling the DNS records the correct thing to do?
Yep.
But it's the spin they're putting on it: "we've been flooded by traffic" - they havnt, they've simply pulled the A record to/avoid/ the flood of traffic. They could simply have responded to media enquiries with "We've had to change the name to avoid the potential flood, please go to http://sco.com" instead. Am I being unreasonable, or is this another example of SCO hype?
I'm sure GNU/Linux can be customized to run with flash memory, or from optical media like Knoppix, but it will take time.
No it wont, already done, long time ago. What do you think embedded linux users use for storage? Indeed, linux has a tailored for flash filesystem, jffs2.
The MyDoom virus launched a denial-of-service attack early Sunday that crippled SCO Group's Web site with hundreds of thousands of requests, an SCO spokesman said.
Strange then that sco.com is working fine, as are their DNS servers. All they've done is pulled A records for their various www hosts and according to netcraft www.sco.com seemed ok too until they pulled the DNS record.
Surely SCO arent hyping this up? Would be very atypical of them..
it does give you the capabilities of VMWare, at a significant performance cost anyways.
You completely missed the point of the post you replied to, didnt you?
While Bochs might provide the capabilities of VMWare at a performance cost, VMWare does not provide any of the capabilities of Bochs. One is a complete and portable implementation in software of an entire architecture, the other merely virtualises an architecture.
If the employee's contract, like mine, states that the company owns all e-mail communication then they owns it.
Nope, because you are in the EU and the EU Human Rights convention grants you the right to have your privacy respected, as implemented in, eg in the UK, the Human Rights Act. There already has been a case before the EUCHR on this subject, i cant find reference to in google unfortunately, but the gist was that an employer read an employees mail and discovered they were gay and the employer was taken to the ECHR iirc.
If you are an employer in the EU, the best policy to take possibly is to provide employees with a dedicated personal email address, eg @people.example.com and be very strict as to the seperation between work and personal email. (if your policies simply ban personal email outright, but its not really enforced and people use email for personal use anyway, and this is accepted, then employees most likely have a right to privacy).
If the email account in question is a work account provided to the employee by the company for work use, then the contents of the account are normally the property of the company, not the employee.
This is incorrect. An employee has a right to privacy, even for work provided email, here in the EU.
sigh... I'm so sick of this. After hearing Ariel Sharon on BBC24 this evening make comments about anti-semitism in Europe (apparently some art exhibition in Sweden has a tasteless piece on a suicide bomber), after reading a 3rd party opinion piece in Time magazine a while ago about rising "anti-semitism" in Europe, I'd like to state: Being critical of Israeli foreign policy is not anti-semitism. (It's criticism of foreign policy - nothing religious in that.).
The attempted labelling of such criticism as anti-semitism is cheap, and forever more has devalued that label. Further, are the Israeli air force officers who criticised the current policies anti-semites too?
For instance, WW2 bombers had accuracies on the order of hundreds or even thousands of yards
Hundreds. From the early 40s the allies had the Norden bomb sight and other gyro-stabilised sights available, with which accuracies of 150 yards could be achieved, 617 squadron apparently could achieve accuracies of 125 yards at altitudes of 20k feet. The USAAF 8th Air Force apparently had much lower accuracy, however 617 squadron were a specialist squadron and hey, how accurate do you need to be when carpet bombing industrial complexes? However, high-precision bombing was indeed quite possible in WWII.
Yes, but pre-war: the Molotov - von Ribbentrop pact of 1939. It didnt last long.:) The Germans attacked the USSR in June 1941. (grave mistake. Their early plans had been to have had britain defeated before attacking the USSR).
Shame so many of the poor sods in the Soviet army later ended up in Siberian Gulags.
Or that so many of them who had fallen into Allied hands were given back to the russians and mostly murdered. Even more of a shame, the non-soviet army USSR nationals who were forcibly repatriated, eg the Cossacks and white russians who fought for the Germans against the Soviet Union. We, the allies, handed these, as well as civilians (eg their families), back to the USSR knowing full well they'd be dead meat. Indeed, british officers on one ship who repatriated USSR nationals actually heard machine gun fire after the repatriatees were unloaded and herded into warehouses dockside. However, we had agreed to repatriation with Stalin at Yalta.
There's a book somewhere which covers this, but I cant remember the name.
A fantastic (if depressing) first-hand account of the Gulags can be found in "The Gulag Archipelago", by Nobel prizewinner Aleksandr Solzhenitstn -- an absolute must-read.
Absolutely. And after reading it you realise that if WWII truely had been about good Vs evil then we fought the lesser of the two evil dictators. But of course WWII wasnt about good Vs evil, it was about power, Hitler was expanionist and hence a threat to power, Stalin was not, he already had plenty of people to persecute.
Most of these movies are made in "Hollywood", in the USA.
Actually, wasnt Private Ryan made mostly in Ireland? The troops in the landing scene are mostly Irish Army from what I've heard. Countryside scenes are all around Waterford or Wexford somewhere.
When meta-moderating, i find it very useful if someone replies to say "why is parent modded foo, cause XYZ", gives me extra information to consider when meta-modding.
I tried myself to expand on the parent's point, to try drag it back on-topic.
Why is the parent modded as troll? Hopefully meta-mods catch this one.
Parent describes a perfectly credible tactic SCO might use: sign nominal but paltry deals with high-profile Linux user(s) and then bleat to the press about it (without disclosing the paltry terms). It would fit in perfectly with their modus operandi so far, eg remember how last year they had signed Unix licencing deals with 2 companies? One disclosed as Microsoft, the other undisclosed (believed to have been Sun).
If you set it to sleep automatically when you close the lid (impossible under linux right now)
Not true, I have a Sony Vaio C1 (old one) which sleeps just fine when you close the lid. It really depends on the laptop's APM implementation in BIOS I guess. (newer laptops are probably all ACPI - no idea how well that works with linux).
1000BASE-T is actually 1000BaseT (and the T can be Tx or Fx etc.. but I'm not too sure what means what), the "Base" is not an acronym, its an abbreviation of baseband.
Slashdot Mirror
"retard=> later ignition"... you're changing the point at which the cam opens the valves in relation to the piston movement, and via the computer no less.
:). These chips tend to have most effect by changing the fuel and ignition maps. (given that variable valve timing is not that wide spread, yet)
Ok, I think you're talking specifically about variable-valve timing engines, eg Honda VTEC probably being one of the best known. I've no idea what kind of adjustibility these systems have via ECU (VTEC seems not be terribly adjustible) - bike engines tend not to have variable-valve timing, too much dead weight
(eg the example in the news article referred to a VW TDI - which doesnt have variable valve timing).
"retard=> later ignition"... you're changing the point at which the cam opens the valves in relation to the piston movement, and via the computer no less.
:)
:)
Well, if you'd like me to correct you again?
You clearly seem to not be appreciating the fact that the cam is a hard, fixed, physical lump of _metal_. It can _not_ be changed in the vast, vast majority of cars. (there are a few high-end engines with mildly adjustable cam timing). The cam controls when the _valves_ are lifted, and for how long. Neither cams, nor valves , nor the timing thereof have anything to do with ignition, least not immediately, and the term "retard" in engine tuning almost always refers to ignition timing.
Ignition, and the advance or retardation of it is controlled by when the spark plug fires, which is _is_ controlled by the ECU.
You're mixing up valve timing, which is nearly always fixed and can not (generally) be changed without major work, often involving replacement of aforementioned physical bits of metal (ie camshaft), with ignition as done by the spark plugs, which _is_ variable and controllable by the ECU.
almost all chips require the use of a higher octane rating and take advantage of the extra power it gives you. (via the retard on the cam)
"via the retard on the cam"? That means _nothing_. And yes, you might to need use higher octane fuel, and _NO_ the extra power had _nothing_ to do with the fuel. The higher octane fuel is required to prevent the engine blowing itself up. Higher octane fuel is merely more resistant to detonation, that is the definition of the octane rating. It does not release extra energy.
you sound book smart but experience short.
Yeah, possibly, I stick to the easy stuff, maintenance and basic tuning. Major stuff I go to my tuner. However, I have a funny feeling I have more experience than you
While you may be able to reprogram the chip back to factory specs before you get it repaired it's still illegal and immoral.
Illegal? Immoral? What planet do you live on?
There are _many_ engine tuning shops which'd be very suprised to find out their busineses are illegal. While, yes, these modified ECUs could indeed kill your engine, it is in the interests of the businesses which sell them to try make sure they dont, or these businesses will not be around for long. Also, many of these chips will be reviewed by car magazines. While not as safe a bet as the original ECU in your car, for those who want the extra (few) horsepower, sure let them, why not? And do you not think that people have been tinkering and modifying engines _long_ before ECUs existed?
Immoral, How on earth do you justify this?
Passing off a car that has been chipped most of its life as standard may well be, but lets face it buying second-hand cars has _long_ been a minefield of potential rip-offs, way way before cars ever had ECUs in the first place. There's just a tonne of ways to get stung when buying a car, formerly chipped car, being just a new, and actually more minor, way. It's the seller who is immoral, if he makes the car out to be something it is not.
Yes, I'm sure the engineers that work for the major auto manufacturers were a tad lazy when tuning the chips for optimum efficiency and safety.
Right, while I agree with the gist of your post, what the hell does safety have to do with it? There's a whole bunch of posters to this story painting this as a safety issue. How?
It simply is not. If it goes wrong, car breaks, ECU-modder gets to pull over and pay even more money for what is potentially a seriously damaged engine. I really dont see the safety angle here..
Wait, I've got it: In some very rare cases, an engine might bust a crankcase and spill oil on the road and hence cause a safety issue. However, lorries and vans and other badly maintained vehicles _regularly_ spill oil and diesel on the roads, so..
Primarily they are changing the amount af retardation on the cam to allow more or less fuel to optimise the mixture...
What kind of gibberish is that?
A cam is a physical, fixed, lump of metal, physically affixed to a shaft. You cant tweak that via an ECU.
You can however, via the ECU, change the ignition advance - the point before TDC on the compression stroke at which the spark plug fires, advance => earlier ignition, retard => later ignition, and change the fuel/air ratio. A stock ECU might indeed be conservative and run the mixture slightly richer (and too lean at certain RPMs known to be used for emissions testing), and ignition slightly retarded to what is optimum for the compression ratio of the engine and the lowest octane fuel in use. However, there isnt really _that_ much performance you can gain from just engine management changes, you really need to change the physical characteristics of the engine in order to make any significant gains in power and actually maintain reliability.
Higher octane fuel btw, does not do _anything_ for performance in itself. If you have an engine built to run reliably on 92RON octane fuel, pouring 100RON into it wont make any difference. Higher octane fuel simply allows an engine to be tuned further, Eg modifying your ECU to run leaner and/or with higher advance might well require using higher octane fuel or reliability _could_ be affected.
I just wish now that *someone* would release a version of fedora core that includes support for mp3 and various popular video formats so that it would make a usable desktop for most people out of the box. What's to stop someone from releasing ISOs of feature-overloaded-fedora ....
/..
The law perhaps? MP3 is patented and players must be licenced and a royalty fee paid. Video: Fedora includes at least one MPEG player. For other formats you most likely need to use Windows DLLs, not freely redistributable, so they cant go into Fedora obviously. Some players provide the ability to link to DVD CSS libraries and hence redistribution is legally impossible it seems.
RedHat cant redistribute these, nor can they even tell users where to go to find these types of players in some cases. This isnt RedHat's fault, it is the legal advice they have gotten and which they must follow. The only way to fix it is to fix the dumb laws which are in place, hence which RedHat must adhere to.
Your time would be far better spent complaining to your Senator, if you are in the US, than complaining on
Isn't pulling the DNS records the correct thing to do?
/avoid/ the flood of traffic. They could simply have responded to media enquiries with "We've had to change the name to avoid the potential flood, please go to http://sco.com" instead. Am I being unreasonable, or is this another example of SCO hype?
Yep.
But it's the spin they're putting on it: "we've been flooded by traffic" - they havnt, they've simply pulled the A record to
I'm sure GNU/Linux can be customized to run with flash memory, or from optical media like Knoppix, but it will take time.
No it wont, already done, long time ago. What do you think embedded linux users use for storage? Indeed, linux has a tailored for flash filesystem, jffs2.
--paulj
The MyDoom virus launched a denial-of-service attack early Sunday that crippled SCO Group's Web site with hundreds of thousands of requests, an SCO spokesman said.
Strange then that sco.com is working fine, as are their DNS servers. All they've done is pulled A records for their various www hosts and according to netcraft www.sco.com seemed ok too until they pulled the DNS record.
Surely SCO arent hyping this up? Would be very atypical of them..
it does give you the capabilities of VMWare, at a significant performance cost anyways.
You completely missed the point of the post you replied to, didnt you?
While Bochs might provide the capabilities of VMWare at a performance cost, VMWare does not provide any of the capabilities of Bochs. One is a complete and portable implementation in software of an entire architecture, the other merely virtualises an architecture.
If the employee's contract, like mine, states that the company owns all e-mail communication then they owns it.
Nope, because you are in the EU and the EU Human Rights convention grants you the right to have your privacy respected, as implemented in, eg in the UK, the Human Rights Act. There already has been a case before the EUCHR on this subject, i cant find reference to in google unfortunately, but the gist was that an employer read an employees mail and discovered they were gay and the employer was taken to the ECHR iirc.
If you are an employer in the EU, the best policy to take possibly is to provide employees with a dedicated personal email address, eg @people.example.com and be very strict as to the seperation between work and personal email. (if your policies simply ban personal email outright, but its not really enforced and people use email for personal use anyway, and this is accepted, then employees most likely have a right to privacy).
If the email account in question is a work account provided to the employee by the company for work use, then the contents of the account are normally the property of the company, not the employee.
This is incorrect. An employee has a right to privacy, even for work provided email, here in the EU.
No it wasnt. Windows NT for AXP was 32bit.
sigh... I'm so sick of this. After hearing Ariel Sharon on BBC24 this evening make comments about anti-semitism in Europe (apparently some art exhibition in Sweden has a tasteless piece on a suicide bomber), after reading a 3rd party opinion piece in Time magazine a while ago about rising "anti-semitism" in Europe, I'd like to state: Being critical of Israeli foreign policy is not anti-semitism. (It's criticism of foreign policy - nothing religious in that.).
The attempted labelling of such criticism as anti-semitism is cheap, and forever more has devalued that label. Further, are the Israeli air force officers who criticised the current policies anti-semites too?
For instance, WW2 bombers had accuracies on the order of hundreds or even thousands of yards
Hundreds. From the early 40s the allies had the Norden bomb sight and other gyro-stabilised sights available, with which accuracies of 150 yards could be achieved, 617 squadron apparently could achieve accuracies of 125 yards at altitudes of 20k feet. The USAAF 8th Air Force apparently had much lower accuracy, however 617 squadron were a specialist squadron and hey, how accurate do you need to be when carpet bombing industrial complexes? However, high-precision bombing was indeed quite possible in WWII.
Yes, but pre-war: the Molotov - von Ribbentrop pact of 1939. It didnt last long. :) The Germans attacked the USSR in June 1941. (grave mistake. Their early plans had been to have had britain defeated before attacking the USSR).
Shame so many of the poor sods in the Soviet army later ended up in Siberian Gulags.
Or that so many of them who had fallen into Allied hands were given back to the russians and mostly murdered. Even more of a shame, the non-soviet army USSR nationals who were forcibly repatriated, eg the Cossacks and white russians who fought for the Germans against the Soviet Union. We, the allies, handed these, as well as civilians (eg their families), back to the USSR knowing full well they'd be dead meat. Indeed, british officers on one ship who repatriated USSR nationals actually heard machine gun fire after the repatriatees were unloaded and herded into warehouses dockside. However, we had agreed to repatriation with Stalin at Yalta.
There's a book somewhere which covers this, but I cant remember the name.
A fantastic (if depressing) first-hand account of the Gulags can be found in "The Gulag Archipelago", by Nobel prizewinner Aleksandr Solzhenitstn -- an absolute must-read.
Absolutely. And after reading it you realise that if WWII truely had been about good Vs evil then we fought the lesser of the two evil dictators. But of course WWII wasnt about good Vs evil, it was about power, Hitler was expanionist and hence a threat to power, Stalin was not, he already had plenty of people to persecute.
Most of these movies are made in "Hollywood", in the USA.
Actually, wasnt Private Ryan made mostly in Ireland? The troops in the landing scene are mostly Irish Army from what I've heard. Countryside scenes are all around Waterford or Wexford somewhere.
When meta-moderating, i find it very useful if someone replies to say "why is parent modded foo, cause XYZ", gives me extra information to consider when meta-modding.
I tried myself to expand on the parent's point, to try drag it back on-topic.
Why is the parent modded as troll? Hopefully meta-mods catch this one.
Parent describes a perfectly credible tactic SCO might use: sign nominal but paltry deals with high-profile Linux user(s) and then bleat to the press about it (without disclosing the paltry terms). It would fit in perfectly with their modus operandi so far, eg remember how last year they had signed Unix licencing deals with 2 companies? One disclosed as Microsoft, the other undisclosed (believed to have been Sun).
Anyway, bad mods..
Since when is Holland a country? :)
:)
Its a province (well, 2) of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Quite a few dutch people would object to being classed as being from "Holland"!
If you set it to sleep automatically when you close the lid (impossible under linux right now)
Not true, I have a Sony Vaio C1 (old one) which sleeps just fine when you close the lid. It really depends on the laptop's APM implementation in BIOS I guess. (newer laptops are probably all ACPI - no idea how well that works with linux).
Ah.. but OTOH, if we assume they *did* mean MB/s, that would be 155*8 = 1.24Gb/s, which is of course OC-24 or STM-8. Which is a bit more respectable.
1000BASE-T is actually 1000BaseT (and the T can be Tx or Fx etc.. but I'm not too sure what means what), the "Base" is not an acronym, its an abbreviation of baseband.
Na is called Natrium in a few european countries too, eg NL for sure, and I'm guessing at least germany too.