456,138,752 / 23sec(rounding up) = 19.8MB/s read off one hard drive, write onto another. The "benchmark" that I ran the other day was really a raw read from one hard drive and writing to a file on another HD (the same 2 HDs actually but in reverse) and I got about 25MB/s sustained speed there. Notice that the.wmv file in question was fragmented too, but not too heavily.
And I remember back on my P200 getting 15MB/sec off my hard disk, which is why I was surprised at your reports and they seemed to be an order of magnitude out of spec. Sorry if I seemed a little condisending or anything, I didn't mean too (I'm a little tired right now, on a 15 hour coding spree =((( )
Anyways, kickass! I gotta come visit Sweeden sometime =)
Damn, I didn't realize that that DMZ is that big. How many users would you assume are within your "local" area??
Hey, didn't expect you to tie together my email with my slashdot post!! Now you've rouined my secret identity! I will have to flee now. Or wait a minute, perhaps that name is a cover too...
Actually this guy seems a little misinformed at times.
$8/mo sure, but $2000 INSTALLATION FEE! Christ, that's insanely high.
And you're telling me that 60 of 62 houses signed up to drop $1600+ just to get some fast internet? That's a little much to believe...
He also seems to have a bit of a hard time distinguishing between MBps and Mbps...
(because I soon found out that a normal harddisk isn't faster than about 30-40 Mbps, even though it is connected with U-DMA-66 etc. Try yourself to transfer files between two harddrives and divide the amount of data in megabits with the time in seconds!)
connections and 25-40 Mbps is possible most of the time - that means it is their single harddisk limiting the speed!
Umm, my hard drives here get 30MB/sec on the 5400rpm drives and 40MB/sec on the 7200rpm drives. Even my older 10gig 5400rpm drive can get 20MB/sec. That's 160Mbit/sec. He is also talking about using UDMA66 citing that as bits per second (it's BYTES folks), and talking about using a fasttrak66 controller with a new 7200rpm drive, you'll easily get at LEAST 20MB/sec off it, if not 30-35MB/sec. Strange that...
I recently have done benchmarks on my drives here and got those numbers. Bandwidth off your drive of 40Mbit/sec (5MByte/sec??) hasn't been seen since the days of the pentium class computers.
Also 1200MB/day?
Damn, I do more than that on my cable line. I know that I'm not exactly your average user, but with 60 people online that's only 20MB/day, and that can run out pretty quickly with just some gaming and some web browsing. I was stuck with 25MB/day avg when I was in university for a term, and BOY did that suck. I can't see them doing less than 1200MB/day on average. I can easily see double that. Especially if they have on average more than 1 computer online per house, and considering how a tech savvy group would be required to do this in the first place, they'll easily clear 1200MB/day.
Hey, I don't doubt that this happened, and damn that's a sweet sweet connection speed, getting 100mbit/sec to a large network of people... DAMN!! =)
Just sounded fishy...
Oh well.. Chances of that happening around where I live are.. oh... NIL! However it might not be impossible to set up a wireless network (on a street of 78 houses MAYBE I could find 10 that would pay more than $200 to set up cheaper faster internet access).
this would actually improve community interaction.
Think about it. I know that it sounds silly, but if you have all of your neighbourhood on the same little network then it becomes much easier to do things like sharing files, playing games, and seeing when everyone's online, dropping notes to everyone to have that BBQ, etc, etc. I know that all of this can be done with the current internet, but having everyone on the same lan makes things a lot easier. I remember in University the dean of my residence was complaining that the networks that we set up were making us more antisocial, but the opposite was actually true. This was before we had internet in residence, and I set up an ICQ server on my machine and had a dedicated proxy out over my phone line and a 56k modem for email access (others allowed me to use their telephone lines and I had a cellphone anyways), and it was great to have everyone in the residence on ICQ at the same time, this was quite cool. We used to talk and use it to organize games and meetings and movies and the such all the time...
Umm, for the html issue, you could name them differently like.htm and.html. Actually IE will automatically interpret HTML in any file that you pass it, so you could name them whatever you wanted. The only other way to do that would be the mac way, and quite frankly I think it's far worse to have to explicitly claim overship on all files and have some load here and some load there just because I saved them with this or that program.
It would be trivial to implement a program in windows that would scan a stream attached to the file to see if you wanted to open this file with a different program than the default, but other than that I can't think of a way to do it short of changing the extension. If you can think of a better way by all means suggest it.
I know that I've never really had a problem, and I commonly use the right click menu option, and it's not much of an inconvenience at all. I commonly edit html/java/js/jsp files in ultraedit, and sometimes view them, sometimes pop them into homepage, and I can do that easily by the right click menu.
You can have more than one program associated with any one file type, and when you right click all of the options will show up for that filetype, and all of the programs that you can use to open the file will show up under "Open With" (BTW, if there is more than one program associated with the certain file extension, the "Open With" option will be there regardless of wether or not you hold down the shift key).
And for the other ones bitching about how the whole right click thing is impossible to find, how would you tell the user about it? I know, how about in that "Welcome to Windows" program that comes up when you install, or the "Windows Tour". It's in both of them if you looked.
And you can also have an extended attribute or any sort of DLL that is run when the user right clicks on a certain type of file (or any file for that matter) that can scan the file in question and change the context menu based on anything that it wants, be it Extended Attributes, alternate File Streams attached to the file, an internal database, or whatever it wants to do.
What's so hard about right clicking, and then choosing either read/edit from there? It takes 0.5 seconds more, and you can set the default action (the doubt left click) to whatever you do more, and then just right click and have the other action at the top of the popup menu.
This, more than the evangelism that goes with the religion, is why I hate Macs.
that (and the rest of your post) echos my exact sentiments! Hear hear. Is it just me or has/. really turned into a tabloid lately and has the anti-microsoft zealotism increased in intensity in the past month?
Well that and the fact that since space launches happen twice a month now it's no longer a big deal.
Back when there was one launch a year then it was a big deal when the launch time came. But it's like anything that is commonplace now. The car, internet, PDAs, really small telephones, all of these were huge public interest items when they were new, but now that they are commonplace it's not that big a deal anymore.
I know that I watched, over the web (on a 56kb modem too!), the launch of the latest mars probe, that was cool to watch, but otherwise yeah it's neat that there are 2 launches a month, but it's commonplace now.
I really really think that NASA should just get into the space tourism game. There is apparently no shortage of people willing to pay $20mil a pop to get into space, and right now I think that every penny will count. Sure, it isn't going to help their $5bil cost overrun, but it's not like they're doing much good up there in space right now anyways. It has been stated many times that you need to have 2 people just to do the day-to-day routines of the space station, and most of the time all 3 crew members are busy just housekeeping. They've said that they will need to be able to have 6 people up there in order to actually accomplish much science, and now that they've cancelled the extra crew habitation quarters....
I think one thing that NASA needs to do is start ADVERTISING. Throw it into the public's face (as you said) about everything cool that they are doing, and everything that they will not be able to do because of budget restrictions. This will be required if they are to get the public support required to get back on their feet.
yeah and what happens when the government starts realizing that they can record everything that you see, and hackers start to grab in and record what you're seeing too? Dunno if I like the implications of that, especially in wake of recent events.
*if* they were entirely conspicuous then perhaps you would have a point, but they're not. And I think it will be a very long time until they will be. How many teachers let you wear sunglasses into your exams? And sunglases with a wierd looking attachment on the side and wires running out of it?
I think that you're looking at 10+ years until this type of technology is even close to real use, and all it would require is for all glasses to be briefly checked as you head into the exam room.
And besides, if you want to check it's not very hard to. There are many many ways to get away with cheating pretty cleanly, but then again you're only cheating yourself in the long run.
I thought that I said this, but in case I didn't: You changed the FSB and the multiplier. Can you change your FSB from 100 now to 112 without changing the PCI bus speed? Or from 66 to 75?
Can you show me any motherboards that support an arbitrary change in the multiplier (the BASE to FSB multiplier)? If you can, I would be very interested to know...
I have never seen a motherboard that can change that multiplier to anything other than 1, 1/2, 1/3, 1/4 and maybe on some 1/5, but other than that you'd need to set a bizarre multiplier in order to clock your FSB to anything other than 66,100,133 or 150. Thus since a lot of overclocked computers can't support a full jump of 33MHz to the FSB (which at the smallest is a 25% jump), they overclock in small steps. Going from 100 to 112 is popular, 133 to 137 or 140, etc, but all of those change the BASE rate (and therefore the PCI rate as well).
I assure you that NONE of the faulty hdds we got replaced were due to overclocking.
Thats fine, but do you have any facts or information to compare the base that you were working with to the rest of the population? I have no doubt that those HD failures had nothing to do with overclocking, but you're dealing with a base of computers that doesn't overclock their computers. How can you extrapolate from that base to the rest of the world? Especially the rest of the hard drive failures?
I've been dealing with positive and negative edge triggering in digital electronics since 1989
Ok, cool, but you couldn't have expected me to know that. I was just explaining it for others, and in case you didn't know =)
Yes, you are very educated, I don't doubt. However I still don't agree =) That and I have a tendancy to like to argue. I admit that I could be wrong about the hard drive failure rate, but I'm almost certain that I am right about the overclocking thing. I just searched on the internet and found no evidence to support what you were talking about and plenty to support what I was saying, so I would be interested to know if I am, in fact, wrong.
Air molecules aside, would this help or hinder the cooling of the drive?
You know, I'd almost assume that it wouldn't make much difference. People were quick to comment on the vacuum doesn't give heat dissipation issue, but don't forget that the air is trapped. So the air will heat up, and then you're left with the same problem.
Now there is still physical contact all throughout the drive, and heat does radiate as well, so painting the inside of the cover black might help. Aside from that, I don't know. Maybe if you put helium inside instead? With it's low density it would allow the heads to get closer to the surface of the disk (since the heads need to float on the cushion of air that's on top of the disk) as well as give you less air resistance.
All modern drives have this feature. This allows them to have a much higher shock rating when off then when operating.
Are you sure? I was under the impression that they just moved them to the innermost track.
You know funny about that shower curtain mystery..
on
IgNobel Awards
·
· Score: 2
I've been wondering about it ever since it was posted... I've done some tests in my shower, and I'm not so sure that what he says is true. Or at least it's not entirely responsible.
I tried the cold shower thing, and the curtain only moved inwards slightly. Not nearly as much as with a hot shower.
And after the water was turned off, the curtains were STILL pulled inwards. As soon as I opened the side a little (to let the air mix) they immediately stopped pulling inwards (hence it would appear to be a temperature difference, not a mysterious mini cyclone effect)
however I don't understand why your wreckage zone is that much higher.
and besides, if you launch from near the ocean and float out into international space, do you still have those problems? surely if you're over the ocean you don't need to worry too much about debris falling on people. Nasa routinely dumps stuff all over the ocean all the time, it can't be that hard to make it a reasonably targeted zone.
at 100,000ft you are not only at 10% of the original density, but you also have a lot of mgh potential energy. So you drop at an angle and you can get your vertical velocity up VERY FAST with a lot less propellant. Drop for about 10 seconds and then kick in your rockets and you're far ahead of the point where you would be if you had used only propellant to get there.
And if you're wondering about orbital/escape speed, it's roughly 7KM/s for orbit and 11KM/s (which is root2 * 7KM/s) for escape, but these are fallicies. You can technically escape the planet at a velocity of 1cm/year, and you can also orbit at 200M/s. However using the GMM/r^2 = mv^2/r (which is how you determine all this from the beginning) at a distance of 0m off the surface you're at 7KM/s orbital speed that decreases the further that you get away from the planet.
Go check out the JTrack 3D satellite tracker to get cool information about all of the orbits/speeds/etc of all of the satellites orbiting our planet.
as I mentioned in other posts, by going up to 100,000ft you're at 10% of the original atmospheric density, and you also have a helluva lotta mgh working for you. just drop and accellerate and you can get your vertical velocity up very fast with a lot less propellant than you'd normally need to get to that point.
here A safety ramp feature virtually eliminates damage to the data area caused by drive mishandling before installation. The first desktop drive with the IBM safety ramp feature (head load/unload capability) helps protect data by moving the heads off the media surface when powering down.
you can wander around that link to get all of the documents referring to this technology and the abilities therein. Take a look at the pictures to see where the heads are parked for shipping.
Not that I don't think IBM drives are not great.
WOAH that response did not compute. Forget the double negatives, let's just go triple! So you think that IBM drives are not great?:)
It depends on how the overclocking is done. If you're just choosing standard CPU multiplier and FSB speeds from BIOS settings, or even jumpers, it should not change the PCI speed (but can). The small 1MHz tweaks that some BIOS support, can change the PCI speed also. You can also explicitely change the PCI speed too if you have the right mobo and read the manual. Just choosing different default CPU speeds should not though.
Woah, sorry to say but you are very misstaken on that.
Everything in your system is based of multiplier settings of a base clock rate (with exception of ISA cards and keyboard/mouse/etc ports). In normal cases that is a standard 33MHz, which conveniently is what the PCI is spec'ed to run at.
For example, with a PII/333 processor your base clock rate is 33MHz, your FSB clock rate is 66MHZ (at a 2x multiplier) and your AGP is also at 66MHz (at a 1x multiplier of FSB, Since the AGP is tied into the FSB it runs at a multiplier of that). Internally to your chip you have a 5x multiplier giving you a nice 333MHz (rounded up of course). On your nice tidy 933MHz system, the clocks are 33Mhz base / 133FSB (4x base) / 66MHz AGP (1/2 FSB). On your 1.4GHz Athlon you're doing funky stuff, and run at 33MHz base / 133FSB (4x base) w/ DDR to the chip ( fires on the leading and falling edge of the signal ) / 66MHz AGP (1/2 base).
You can get DDR memory too which does the same as the CPU. The P4 runs at QDR rates, which have a 33MHz base, 150MHz FSB (4.5x base), QDR to the Chip, etc.
Now the problem is that when you up the clockrate of your chip, you're really changing the BASE rate, and everything else changes in tandem. The options are usually given as an FSB rate, but what they're really changing is the BASE rate. This is why you'll see options like 100/3 112/3 133/3 and 133/4. The first 3 run the FSB at 3x the BASE rate, and the last one runs it at 4x the BASE rate. The problem is that most motherboards only support a maximum of 4x BASE for FSB, thus when you run your chip rated at an 133FSB (or 266DDR) at 150FSB (or 300DDR) you're running your BASE at 37.5MHz, which is in turn running all your PCI peripherals at 37.5MHz, which includes your IDE controller. amond other things.
The specs for AGP is 66MHz and PCI is 33MHz. As with anything else, sometimes you can't overclock your chip at all. In these cases you're lucky that you (usually) have a thermal diode in your chip which can throttle (or in the PIII's case cause a "catastrophic thermal shutdown", I LOVE that term, it's a technical term!). You're also lucky that in most cases your chip will fail from heat problems BEFORE causing silicon damage from the heat, but this can happen. Since you HD doesn't have any termal protection on the chip, much less active cooling, it is indeed easy to fry your IDE controller chip on the HD itself, especially if you like running your FSB at 45MHz (which translates to a nice tidy 180MHZ FSB).
And the techs (there have been more than 1 that have said this) that I was talking to are knowledgeable, it's pretty easy to figure out when they know what they're talking about (or more appropriately, when they DON'T which happens far too often:> )
Possible, but definetely NOT the most common reason. I've been over clocking since it required soldering ; ),
As I pointed out, since the HD has no thermal protection there are many problems that can be caused by overclocking, and I would think that the O/Cing in the time that it required soldering (386?) wasn't nearly as intensive as it is now =). I remember hacking a 386 mobo up to 33MHz from 25. Oh for the days =).
I'd wager a guess that any HD problems that have bad sectors are NOT caused by overclocking, but drive failures that are intermittent or just stop working or cause the system to do funny things (which, since I sell computers on-the-side too, in my experience with about 12 defective HDs over 3 years only 2 have had the bad sector problem, the rest were the wierd failures, and 8 of the 10 admitted to overclocking their systems) I can conclude that what the techs were saying is true:)
But of course, I could just be TOTALLY off my rocker:)
However I think that the IBM failure problem has nothing to do with overclocking. The CLUNK-CLUNK-CLUNK-SCREEEEEETCH noises tell me there's something else going on:)
all computers now existing would not longer be able to be sold on the used market
I would assume, or rather hope, that the law would not be retroactive and would apply to new hardware sales only.
And I would also assume that there would be software solutions that would provide the required ability to make the older computers legit. But I could be wrong.
I seem to recall hearing about "wet" drives about 5 years ago, where they used a layer of water on the surface of the disk... they reconed that they could make it thinner and thus get the heads closer to the disk with less chance of damage.
However I can't find any links to this idea. Guess it never got off the design board.
Why can't the heads just be aligned to the surface instead of relying on the air cushion? Or use something that's not as thick as air (hmm, pack it with helium! heads get closer, less resistance) or I dunno, but there's gotta be a better way.
I just tried it on my phone (simulated of course) and it seems like it'd be a LARGE step backwards from the current T9/etc that's on the market. I've used T9 and it works great, and do most of the typing by holding the phone with my hand and using my thumb on that hand only. I can get decent amounts done that way. (I have a Sony J5 BTW)... This way you're pretty much required to use 2 hands, which makes it pretty inconvenient for places where you only have one hand available.
And actually I doubt if it's any faster. You need to move your entire hand around and hit those small small keys with different fingers which is pretty awkward to do. I can't see this being much faster than T9, or what will soon be (give it a year or so) voice dictated anyways.
And besides, how much text do you ACTUALLY send on your cellphone? I use the email feature to CHECK email and send a 5 word reply. I use SMS to RECEIVE traffic/weather/etc updates and the occasional note by my friends. But if I need to talk with one of them, I call them! I have the phone right there and talking is BY FAR FAR FAR more efficient than any typing method would be.
if you can get 16km up (which is pretty easy even with a large load) you've cut out a LARGE portion of the density of the atmosphere. For every 16km up you're down to 1/10th of the density. So 16km up is 0.1atm and 32km up is 0.01atm.
Needless to say 90% reduction in density leads to _significantly_ less air resistance. Now although air resistance is not a huge drag (no pun intended) it does play a part. Add to the equation now that you're 16km up without using any feul, and you have that much more potential energy to use to get up to speed.
And the risk of building that is... negligable. These things are, by definition, aerodynamic. If you drop the plane straight down all you have to do is pull back on the yoke and pretty soon you'll be flying vertical again. The balloon has to do nothing more than just drop the rocket.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds nice if you got those numbers on actual transfers and not on a silly benchmarking program.
/t & copy enterprise-pilot.wmv c:\ & time /t & del C:\enterprise-pilot.wmv
.wmv file in question was fragmented too, but not too heavily.
Well since you asked =)
I just did this from 1 hard drive in my machine to another (40gb 7200rpm IBM drive to a 20gb 5400rpm WD):
[d:\download]time
17:58:17
D:\Download\enterprise-pilot.wmv => C:\enterprise-pilot.wmv
1 file copied
17:58:39
Deleting C:\enterprise-pilot.wmv
1 file deleted 456,138,752 bytes freed
456,138,752 / 23sec(rounding up) = 19.8MB/s read off one hard drive, write onto another. The "benchmark" that I ran the other day was really a raw read from one hard drive and writing to a file on another HD (the same 2 HDs actually but in reverse) and I got about 25MB/s sustained speed there. Notice that the
And I remember back on my P200 getting 15MB/sec off my hard disk, which is why I was surprised at your reports and they seemed to be an order of magnitude out of spec. Sorry if I seemed a little condisending or anything, I didn't mean too (I'm a little tired right now, on a 15 hour coding spree =((( )
Anyways, kickass! I gotta come visit Sweeden sometime =)
Damn, I didn't realize that that DMZ is that big. How many users would you assume are within your "local" area??
Hey, didn't expect you to tie together my email with my slashdot post!! Now you've rouined my secret identity! I will have to flee now. Or wait a minute, perhaps that name is a cover too...
Actually this guy seems a little misinformed at times.
$8/mo sure, but $2000 INSTALLATION FEE! Christ, that's insanely high.
And you're telling me that 60 of 62 houses signed up to drop $1600+ just to get some fast internet? That's a little much to believe...
He also seems to have a bit of a hard time distinguishing between MBps and Mbps...
(because I soon found out that a normal harddisk isn't faster than about 30-40 Mbps, even though it is connected with U-DMA-66 etc. Try yourself to transfer files between two harddrives and divide the amount of data in megabits with the time in seconds!)
connections and 25-40 Mbps is possible most of the time - that means it is their single harddisk limiting the speed!
Umm, my hard drives here get 30MB/sec on the 5400rpm drives and 40MB/sec on the 7200rpm drives. Even my older 10gig 5400rpm drive can get 20MB/sec. That's 160Mbit/sec. He is also talking about using UDMA66 citing that as bits per second (it's BYTES folks), and talking about using a fasttrak66 controller with a new 7200rpm drive, you'll easily get at LEAST 20MB/sec off it, if not 30-35MB/sec. Strange that...
I recently have done benchmarks on my drives here and got those numbers. Bandwidth off your drive of 40Mbit/sec (5MByte/sec??) hasn't been seen since the days of the pentium class computers.
Also 1200MB/day?
Damn, I do more than that on my cable line. I know that I'm not exactly your average user, but with 60 people online that's only 20MB/day, and that can run out pretty quickly with just some gaming and some web browsing. I was stuck with 25MB/day avg when I was in university for a term, and BOY did that suck. I can't see them doing less than 1200MB/day on average. I can easily see double that. Especially if they have on average more than 1 computer online per house, and considering how a tech savvy group would be required to do this in the first place, they'll easily clear 1200MB/day.
Hey, I don't doubt that this happened, and damn that's a sweet sweet connection speed, getting 100mbit/sec to a large network of people... DAMN!! =)
Just sounded fishy...
Oh well.. Chances of that happening around where I live are.. oh... NIL! However it might not be impossible to set up a wireless network (on a street of 78 houses MAYBE I could find 10 that would pay more than $200 to set up cheaper faster internet access).
Anyone else notice these problems? Strange...
this would actually improve community interaction.
Think about it. I know that it sounds silly, but if you have all of your neighbourhood on the same little network then it becomes much easier to do things like sharing files, playing games, and seeing when everyone's online, dropping notes to everyone to have that BBQ, etc, etc. I know that all of this can be done with the current internet, but having everyone on the same lan makes things a lot easier. I remember in University the dean of my residence was complaining that the networks that we set up were making us more antisocial, but the opposite was actually true. This was before we had internet in residence, and I set up an ICQ server on my machine and had a dedicated proxy out over my phone line and a 56k modem for email access (others allowed me to use their telephone lines and I had a cellphone anyways), and it was great to have everyone in the residence on ICQ at the same time, this was quite cool. We used to talk and use it to organize games and meetings and movies and the such all the time...
Oh back to the good old days. =P
Well no, you did bring up a valid point.
.htm and .html. Actually IE will automatically interpret HTML in any file that you pass it, so you could name them whatever you wanted. The only other way to do that would be the mac way, and quite frankly I think it's far worse to have to explicitly claim overship on all files and have some load here and some load there just because I saved them with this or that program.
Umm, for the html issue, you could name them differently like
It would be trivial to implement a program in windows that would scan a stream attached to the file to see if you wanted to open this file with a different program than the default, but other than that I can't think of a way to do it short of changing the extension. If you can think of a better way by all means suggest it.
I know that I've never really had a problem, and I commonly use the right click menu option, and it's not much of an inconvenience at all. I commonly edit html/java/js/jsp files in ultraedit, and sometimes view them, sometimes pop them into homepage, and I can do that easily by the right click menu.
what file are you talking about? what application? maybe I can figure something out for you.
You can have more than one program associated with any one file type, and when you right click all of the options will show up for that filetype, and all of the programs that you can use to open the file will show up under "Open With" (BTW, if there is more than one program associated with the certain file extension, the "Open With" option will be there regardless of wether or not you hold down the shift key).
And for the other ones bitching about how the whole right click thing is impossible to find, how would you tell the user about it? I know, how about in that "Welcome to Windows" program that comes up when you install, or the "Windows Tour". It's in both of them if you looked.
And you can also have an extended attribute or any sort of DLL that is run when the user right clicks on a certain type of file (or any file for that matter) that can scan the file in question and change the context menu based on anything that it wants, be it Extended Attributes, alternate File Streams attached to the file, an internal database, or whatever it wants to do.
What's so hard about right clicking, and then choosing either read/edit from there? It takes 0.5 seconds more, and you can set the default action (the doubt left click) to whatever you do more, and then just right click and have the other action at the top of the popup menu.
This, more than the evangelism that goes with the religion, is why I hate Macs.
/. really turned into a tabloid lately and has the anti-microsoft zealotism increased in intensity in the past month?
that (and the rest of your post) echos my exact sentiments! Hear hear. Is it just me or has
Funny you should mention times of india...
India silently approves attacks
Well that and the fact that since space launches happen twice a month now it's no longer a big deal.
Back when there was one launch a year then it was a big deal when the launch time came. But it's like anything that is commonplace now. The car, internet, PDAs, really small telephones, all of these were huge public interest items when they were new, but now that they are commonplace it's not that big a deal anymore.
I know that I watched, over the web (on a 56kb modem too!), the launch of the latest mars probe, that was cool to watch, but otherwise yeah it's neat that there are 2 launches a month, but it's commonplace now.
I really really think that NASA should just get into the space tourism game. There is apparently no shortage of people willing to pay $20mil a pop to get into space, and right now I think that every penny will count. Sure, it isn't going to help their $5bil cost overrun, but it's not like they're doing much good up there in space right now anyways. It has been stated many times that you need to have 2 people just to do the day-to-day routines of the space station, and most of the time all 3 crew members are busy just housekeeping. They've said that they will need to be able to have 6 people up there in order to actually accomplish much science, and now that they've cancelled the extra crew habitation quarters....
I think one thing that NASA needs to do is start ADVERTISING. Throw it into the public's face (as you said) about everything cool that they are doing, and everything that they will not be able to do because of budget restrictions. This will be required if they are to get the public support required to get back on their feet.
yeah and what happens when the government starts realizing that they can record everything that you see, and hackers start to grab in and record what you're seeing too? Dunno if I like the implications of that, especially in wake of recent events.
*if* they were entirely conspicuous then perhaps you would have a point, but they're not. And I think it will be a very long time until they will be. How many teachers let you wear sunglasses into your exams? And sunglases with a wierd looking attachment on the side and wires running out of it?
I think that you're looking at 10+ years until this type of technology is even close to real use, and all it would require is for all glasses to be briefly checked as you head into the exam room.
And besides, if you want to check it's not very hard to. There are many many ways to get away with cheating pretty cleanly, but then again you're only cheating yourself in the long run.
will all be fire retardant
Come on, it's not "fire retardant" it's "thermally challenged".
Not very PC if you ask me =P
I opened it, cut a track, now it supports 100FSB.
I thought that I said this, but in case I didn't: You changed the FSB and the multiplier. Can you change your FSB from 100 now to 112 without changing the PCI bus speed? Or from 66 to 75?
Can you show me any motherboards that support an arbitrary change in the multiplier (the BASE to FSB multiplier)? If you can, I would be very interested to know...
I have never seen a motherboard that can change that multiplier to anything other than 1, 1/2, 1/3, 1/4 and maybe on some 1/5, but other than that you'd need to set a bizarre multiplier in order to clock your FSB to anything other than 66,100,133 or 150. Thus since a lot of overclocked computers can't support a full jump of 33MHz to the FSB (which at the smallest is a 25% jump), they overclock in small steps. Going from 100 to 112 is popular, 133 to 137 or 140, etc, but all of those change the BASE rate (and therefore the PCI rate as well).
I assure you that NONE of the faulty hdds we got replaced were due to overclocking.
Thats fine, but do you have any facts or information to compare the base that you were working with to the rest of the population? I have no doubt that those HD failures had nothing to do with overclocking, but you're dealing with a base of computers that doesn't overclock their computers. How can you extrapolate from that base to the rest of the world? Especially the rest of the hard drive failures?
I've been dealing with positive and negative edge triggering in digital electronics since 1989
Ok, cool, but you couldn't have expected me to know that. I was just explaining it for others, and in case you didn't know =)
Yes, you are very educated, I don't doubt. However I still don't agree =) That and I have a tendancy to like to argue. I admit that I could be wrong about the hard drive failure rate, but I'm almost certain that I am right about the overclocking thing. I just searched on the internet and found no evidence to support what you were talking about and plenty to support what I was saying, so I would be interested to know if I am, in fact, wrong.
Air molecules aside, would this help or hinder the cooling of the drive?
You know, I'd almost assume that it wouldn't make much difference. People were quick to comment on the vacuum doesn't give heat dissipation issue, but don't forget that the air is trapped. So the air will heat up, and then you're left with the same problem.
Now there is still physical contact all throughout the drive, and heat does radiate as well, so painting the inside of the cover black might help. Aside from that, I don't know. Maybe if you put helium inside instead? With it's low density it would allow the heads to get closer to the surface of the disk (since the heads need to float on the cushion of air that's on top of the disk) as well as give you less air resistance.
All modern drives have this feature. This allows them to have a much higher shock rating when off then when operating.
Are you sure? I was under the impression that they just moved them to the innermost track.
I've been wondering about it ever since it was posted... I've done some tests in my shower, and I'm not so sure that what he says is true. Or at least it's not entirely responsible.
I tried the cold shower thing, and the curtain only moved inwards slightly. Not nearly as much as with a hot shower.
And after the water was turned off, the curtains were STILL pulled inwards. As soon as I opened the side a little (to let the air mix) they immediately stopped pulling inwards (hence it would appear to be a temperature difference, not a mysterious mini cyclone effect)
Anyone else tried it?
cool sounds like an interesting response.
however I don't understand why your wreckage zone is that much higher.
and besides, if you launch from near the ocean and float out into international space, do you still have those problems? surely if you're over the ocean you don't need to worry too much about debris falling on people. Nasa routinely dumps stuff all over the ocean all the time, it can't be that hard to make it a reasonably targeted zone.
why am I the only one who seems this point?
at 100,000ft you are not only at 10% of the original density, but you also have a lot of mgh potential energy. So you drop at an angle and you can get your vertical velocity up VERY FAST with a lot less propellant. Drop for about 10 seconds and then kick in your rockets and you're far ahead of the point where you would be if you had used only propellant to get there.
And if you're wondering about orbital/escape speed, it's roughly 7KM/s for orbit and 11KM/s (which is root2 * 7KM/s) for escape, but these are fallicies. You can technically escape the planet at a velocity of 1cm/year, and you can also orbit at 200M/s. However using the GMM/r^2 = mv^2/r (which is how you determine all this from the beginning) at a distance of 0m off the surface you're at 7KM/s orbital speed that decreases the further that you get away from the planet.
Go check out the JTrack 3D satellite tracker to get cool information about all of the orbits/speeds/etc of all of the satellites orbiting our planet.
Anyways, I know what I'm talking about =)
as I mentioned in other posts, by going up to 100,000ft you're at 10% of the original atmospheric density, and you also have a helluva lotta mgh working for you. just drop and accellerate and you can get your vertical velocity up very fast with a lot less propellant than you'd normally need to get to that point.
Can you provide a link to support this?
:)
:> )
:)
:)
:)
Absolutely!
here
A safety ramp feature virtually eliminates damage to the data area caused by drive mishandling before installation.
The first desktop drive with the IBM safety ramp feature (head load/unload capability) helps protect data by moving the heads off the media surface when powering down.
you can wander around that link to get all of the documents referring to this technology and the abilities therein. Take a look at the pictures to see where the heads are parked for shipping.
Not that I don't think IBM drives are not great.
WOAH that response did not compute. Forget the double negatives, let's just go triple! So you think that IBM drives are not great?
It depends on how the overclocking is done. If you're just choosing standard CPU multiplier and FSB speeds from BIOS settings, or even jumpers, it should not change the PCI speed (but can). The small 1MHz tweaks that some BIOS support, can change the PCI speed also. You can also explicitely change the PCI speed too if you have the right mobo and read the manual. Just choosing different default CPU speeds should not though.
Woah, sorry to say but you are very misstaken on that.
Everything in your system is based of multiplier settings of a base clock rate (with exception of ISA cards and keyboard/mouse/etc ports). In normal cases that is a standard 33MHz, which conveniently is what the PCI is spec'ed to run at.
For example, with a PII/333 processor your base clock rate is 33MHz, your FSB clock rate is 66MHZ (at a 2x multiplier) and your AGP is also at 66MHz (at a 1x multiplier of FSB, Since the AGP is tied into the FSB it runs at a multiplier of that). Internally to your chip you have a 5x multiplier giving you a nice 333MHz (rounded up of course). On your nice tidy 933MHz system, the clocks are 33Mhz base / 133FSB (4x base) / 66MHz AGP (1/2 FSB). On your 1.4GHz Athlon you're doing funky stuff, and run at 33MHz base / 133FSB (4x base) w/ DDR to the chip ( fires on the leading and falling edge of the signal ) / 66MHz AGP (1/2 base).
You can get DDR memory too which does the same as the CPU. The P4 runs at QDR rates, which have a 33MHz base, 150MHz FSB (4.5x base), QDR to the Chip, etc.
Now the problem is that when you up the clockrate of your chip, you're really changing the BASE rate, and everything else changes in tandem. The options are usually given as an FSB rate, but what they're really changing is the BASE rate. This is why you'll see options like 100/3 112/3 133/3 and 133/4. The first 3 run the FSB at 3x the BASE rate, and the last one runs it at 4x the BASE rate. The problem is that most motherboards only support a maximum of 4x BASE for FSB, thus when you run your chip rated at an 133FSB (or 266DDR) at 150FSB (or 300DDR) you're running your BASE at 37.5MHz, which is in turn running all your PCI peripherals at 37.5MHz, which includes your IDE controller. amond other things.
The specs for AGP is 66MHz and PCI is 33MHz. As with anything else, sometimes you can't overclock your chip at all. In these cases you're lucky that you (usually) have a thermal diode in your chip which can throttle (or in the PIII's case cause a "catastrophic thermal shutdown", I LOVE that term, it's a technical term!). You're also lucky that in most cases your chip will fail from heat problems BEFORE causing silicon damage from the heat, but this can happen. Since you HD doesn't have any termal protection on the chip, much less active cooling, it is indeed easy to fry your IDE controller chip on the HD itself, especially if you like running your FSB at 45MHz (which translates to a nice tidy 180MHZ FSB).
And the techs (there have been more than 1 that have said this) that I was talking to are knowledgeable, it's pretty easy to figure out when they know what they're talking about (or more appropriately, when they DON'T which happens far too often
Possible, but definetely NOT the most common reason. I've been over clocking since it required soldering ; ),
As I pointed out, since the HD has no thermal protection there are many problems that can be caused by overclocking, and I would think that the O/Cing in the time that it required soldering (386?) wasn't nearly as intensive as it is now =). I remember hacking a 386 mobo up to 33MHz from 25. Oh for the days =).
I'd wager a guess that any HD problems that have bad sectors are NOT caused by overclocking, but drive failures that are intermittent or just stop working or cause the system to do funny things (which, since I sell computers on-the-side too, in my experience with about 12 defective HDs over 3 years only 2 have had the bad sector problem, the rest were the wierd failures, and 8 of the 10 admitted to overclocking their systems) I can conclude that what the techs were saying is true
But of course, I could just be TOTALLY off my rocker
However I think that the IBM failure problem has nothing to do with overclocking. The CLUNK-CLUNK-CLUNK-SCREEEEEETCH noises tell me there's something else going on
all computers now existing would not longer be able to be sold on the used market
I would assume, or rather hope, that the law would not be retroactive and would apply to new hardware sales only.
And I would also assume that there would be software solutions that would provide the required ability to make the older computers legit. But I could be wrong.
I seem to recall hearing about "wet" drives about 5 years ago, where they used a layer of water on the surface of the disk... they reconed that they could make it thinner and thus get the heads closer to the disk with less chance of damage.
However I can't find any links to this idea. Guess it never got off the design board.
Why can't the heads just be aligned to the surface instead of relying on the air cushion? Or use something that's not as thick as air (hmm, pack it with helium! heads get closer, less resistance) or I dunno, but there's gotta be a better way.
I just tried it on my phone (simulated of course) and it seems like it'd be a LARGE step backwards from the current T9/etc that's on the market. I've used T9 and it works great, and do most of the typing by holding the phone with my hand and using my thumb on that hand only. I can get decent amounts done that way. (I have a Sony J5 BTW)... This way you're pretty much required to use 2 hands, which makes it pretty inconvenient for places where you only have one hand available.
And actually I doubt if it's any faster. You need to move your entire hand around and hit those small small keys with different fingers which is pretty awkward to do. I can't see this being much faster than T9, or what will soon be (give it a year or so) voice dictated anyways.
And besides, how much text do you ACTUALLY send on your cellphone? I use the email feature to CHECK email and send a 5 word reply. I use SMS to RECEIVE traffic/weather/etc updates and the occasional note by my friends. But if I need to talk with one of them, I call them! I have the phone right there and talking is BY FAR FAR FAR more efficient than any typing method would be.
One other thing:
... negligable. These things are, by definition, aerodynamic. If you drop the plane straight down all you have to do is pull back on the yoke and pretty soon you'll be flying vertical again. The balloon has to do nothing more than just drop the rocket.
if you can get 16km up (which is pretty easy even with a large load) you've cut out a LARGE portion of the density of the atmosphere. For every 16km up you're down to 1/10th of the density. So 16km up is 0.1atm and 32km up is 0.01atm.
Needless to say 90% reduction in density leads to _significantly_ less air resistance. Now although air resistance is not a huge drag (no pun intended) it does play a part. Add to the equation now that you're 16km up without using any feul, and you have that much more potential energy to use to get up to speed.
And the risk of building that is