Are you trying to say that paying more a the book guarantee that it has less environmental impact than if you'd paid less for it?
Or maybe what you're saying is that if the book was half the price you'd buy two, and that you're not disciplined enough to be environmentally conscious without being financially constrained.
My opinion is that the price of the book and its environmental impact are not directly connected. If you pay less for the book, you'll have money that will allow you to spend it on having less environmental impact elsewhere in your life.
Some forms of active suspension mean your car can have suspension matched to the weight of the car and its loads, you can have suspension matched to an empty car when its empty and matched to a fully laden car when its loaded up instead of having a compromise setup thats matched to neither laden or unladen. How many times have you seen a car where the rear is low because of the load of the passengers or the trailer its towing?
Other forms of active suspension means you can have soft suspension when you're driving in a straight line and only have stiffer suspension when you are cornering, the result is that you can make your "cornering" rates higher performance without sacrificing your "straight line" comfort.
Other forms again allow the car to stiffen is anti roll bars and to corner flat.
Citroen has produced suspension systems that do all of the above on production cars, their first systems (on the DS and later cars) only self levelled, later their Hydractive system on the XM had "hard" and "soft" settings too eventually the Activa system on the Xantia added active anti roll bars too.
Formula One cars used active suspension, it could vary suspension rates, ride heights and anti-roll stiffness, it gave the cars that had it a competitive advantage over those that didn't but was eventually banned.
Given that some programmers never manage to master C++ even after several years of using it, you're being pretty optimistic. There is a big difference between grasping the basics of a language and knowing it well enough to avoid its various pitfalls e.g. object slicing or non-virtual destructors in C++.
To get to the level where you can write good C++ takes more than a fortnight, if you (or anybody for that matter) could get through the right books (Stroustrup, Meyers x 3, Sutter x 2, Alexandrescu) and assimilate all of the knowledge they contain in a fortnight I'd be pretty impressed.
Some while ago I was working on a project and needed to gather some information about the CPU in a system and its particular capabilities.
As a starting point, I took a look at some example source code published by Intel and found that it would not check for the capabilities I was looking for if the CPU was not an Intel CPU, i.e. it searched for the "GenuineIntel" string and if it didn't find it, the code reported that those features were not there.
I wrote my own code and made sure that my code would work on AMD, Intel or VIA CPUs, the CPUID instruction is designed to tell you not just what the capabilities of the CPU are but also can tell you what features the CPUID function can report. Checking for a "GenuineIntel" string is just plain lazy programming at best and anti-competitive practice at worse.
There are issues with solar power. For example, I like to use lights in my house at night, when its dark, i.e. when the sun has set and the solar panels don't work. Solar panels are additional infrastructure and batteries are inefficient, and the industrial processes for producing both have the potential to be "not very clean".
You didn't mention either hydro or wind power either, they can both be clean alternatives.
The OS & Applications simply don't see the difference between two real cores and a hyperthreading core. I have written wrote code specifically for mapping threads to cores to sockets, it can be done although it is tricky to do.
One of the reasons that x86 is able to perform as well as it does is its code density, that is a measure of how small a number of instructions (and the memory you need to store them) is compared to the work they can do.
RISC architectures don't give very good code density, so ARM have their ARM Thumb compressed instruction set, thats the way the embedded processors acheive good power efficiency, by cutting down the amount of memory traffic that instruction requests generate.
You can think of x86 as a way to compress the storage needed to contain the equivilent RISC instructions needed to perform the same work, that means that you make better use of available memory bandwidth and caches etc, your memory is vastly slower than the processor so you've got to make use of its bandwidth efficiently.
Assuming the price of your gasoline doesn't change when it goes from 100% to a 85/15 mix.....
$3.20 / $3.99 = 0.80
What you're saying is that when you dilute gasoline down to 85% with ethanol, it then only contains 80% of the energy that it contained before you diluted it, due to the ethanol's lower power density.
You're actually saying that ethanol has a negative energy density.
It sounds great. My only question is why they're using a diesel engine, when the military currently uses turbines, which are generally more fuel efficient, and require less maintenance.
You need to do more than just shield the cockpit. Every wire that runs along the length of the plane is a potential aerial, it could pick up the wi-fi signal and carry it to somewhere where it can cause problems.
The ILS system (or modern equivilent) is what is most susceptable to interference, thats the system that lands the plane, it can land a plane when the conditions are so bad that the pilot can't see the runway. Modern planes land themselves pretty much, they follow a radio signal to the end of the runway. If the ILS signal is interfered with at the wrong time the plane might not land on the runway, it could overshoot, undershoot or hit the ground in another expensive and embarrasing way.
The bulging capacitor problem was nothing to do with overclocking. Bulging capacitors was caused by substandard electrolyte in capacitors that broke down over time and became conductive.
I had a couple of Abit boards with dodgy caps, they made a sort of "phut" noise as the charged capacitor discharged itself through the electrolyte, thats why they bulged and leaked. New capacitors solved the problem, but I couldn't find new capacitors that were the same size and same rating as the originals, all of the ones that were the same rating were physically larger, that says the originals were undersized.
Slot A was the equivilent to Slot 1, which isn't mentioned here.
Often with Intel the older CPUs don't work in the newer motherboards even when the socket is the same, where as I can't recall that happening with any AMD motherboard I've ever had.
Toyota Prius 65mpg (Hybrid Petrol) Citroen C4 HDI 65mpg (Diesel)
On the combined cycle test (Standard European fuel economy test), the two cars are equvilent. On highway, constant speed cruise the Prius has a petrol engine and an inefficient transmission, its at best as efficient as the equivilent petrol at cruise. The diesel is something like 25%-33% more efficient at cruise.
My understanding of the dual core P4s is that they don't share their cache at all.
They are in fact 2 processor dies in one package, so functionally it is two separate chips rather than the AMD approach which is having a pair of processors with fast interconnects (faster than the FSB) between them.
I'm not sure how relevent this is to the debate about mobile dual core....
Someone who has coded in VB.Net for years would be a far better choice for a Managed C++.Net project than someone who has programmed in C++ on another platform for years
Actually thats not at all true. I'm a C++ programmer and have used Win32 and MFC over a number of years. When I first started using.Net I couldn't help but notice that the GUI library at least, is very similar to MFCs GUI bits..Net appears to me to be a very thin veil covering MFC and the Win32 API!
Programmers make mistakes, the mistakes have to be found and fixed. Burying your head in the sand doesn't help. I was once told that a successful test is one that finds a fault, a test that finds no faults serves no purpose.
Catalysts have very little effect on particulate emmissions, they only have a real affect on gaseous emmisions.
There is a good reason to remove catalysts from engines because they add to the CO2 emissions and cause more fuel consumption. The model of car I have didn't originally have a catalyst, offical fuel consumption 43mpg, later models were fitted with a catalyst and EGR and fuel consumption falls to 40mpg. Catalysts trade CO2 emissions for CO, NOx and HC emmissions. If car engines could be made cleaner so that they don't need catalysts at all that would be closer to the ideal solution.
Not only would the device STILL be wasting electricity by going to standby power levels instead of turning off completely but you'd be using an inefficent method of storing the power too.
In the UK we've got switched power sockets on our walls, but they don't switch the earth so if you turn your PC off at the wall its turned off but still earthed, i.e. no static when upgrading.
Its always puzzled me why the US backhoe loaders are different to the ones we get in the UK. That one pictured, is a JCB 3CX, the back arm can be slid from side to side, thats handy if you need to dig a trench next to a wall. The JCB pictured also has a 7 in 1 bucket and an extending back arm which the one pictured in the parent post doesn't have.
The US style jacks give better stability, I suppose but they dont do a lot for versatility or compactness.
I've seen the Viper video too, the reason he goes off the cliff is that he locks the wheels which means he can't steer. At the point of going off the cliff he wasn't actually going to fast for the corner, ABS OR manual cadence braking (taking your foot off the brake pedal) would have saved the car.
ABS can shorten stopping distances, most noticable on wet tarmac, but that wasnt why it was designed. ABS is all about control.
On snow, ABS can actually lengthen stopping distances. Without ABS on snow, you can lock up the wheels and the car will pile up snow in front of the wheels rather than driving over it. When its slippery this sort of snow plough effect can be more significant in stopping the car than the friction between rubber and road. Snow is the ONLY time you'd want to be able to disable the ABS on your car, and other time you're not doing anything useful by turning it off.
What happened was that the engineers did the test themselves first before the TV cameras arrives, to make sure that it would all go to plan, they didn't want to embarrass themselves. What they realised was that the system didn't work so they decided to fake the test for the TV cameras. They had to brake manually but with the smoke, they obviously couldn't see the car in front so they placed markers down so the drivers knew when to brake. The markers they used were pieces of wood placed on the road, the idea being that the driver would feel the bump as the car drove over it. The problem was that the S Class Mercedes has suspension that is good at absorbing bumps so that one of the drivers missed his marker when the cameras were filming, hence the collision.
Slashdot Mirror
The mathematical algorithm may be correct, but is the implementation of it correct and how do you verify it?
A computer program can not be proven to be correct in a number of relatively quick and easy ways.
Are you trying to say that paying more a the book guarantee that it has less environmental impact than if you'd paid less for it?
Or maybe what you're saying is that if the book was half the price you'd buy two, and that you're not disciplined enough to be environmentally conscious without being financially constrained.
My opinion is that the price of the book and its environmental impact are not directly connected. If you pay less for the book, you'll have money that will allow you to spend it on having less environmental impact elsewhere in your life.
Some forms of active suspension mean your car can have suspension matched to the weight of the car and its loads, you can have suspension matched to an empty car when its empty and matched to a fully laden car when its loaded up instead of having a compromise setup thats matched to neither laden or unladen. How many times have you seen a car where the rear is low because of the load of the passengers or the trailer its towing?
Other forms of active suspension means you can have soft suspension when you're driving in a straight line and only have stiffer suspension when you are cornering, the result is that you can make your "cornering" rates higher performance without sacrificing your "straight line" comfort.
Other forms again allow the car to stiffen is anti roll bars and to corner flat.
Citroen has produced suspension systems that do all of the above on production cars, their first systems (on the DS and later cars) only self levelled, later their Hydractive system on the XM had "hard" and "soft" settings too eventually the Activa system on the Xantia added active anti roll bars too.
Formula One cars used active suspension, it could vary suspension rates, ride heights and anti-roll stiffness, it gave the cars that had it a competitive advantage over those that didn't but was eventually banned.
Given that some programmers never manage to master C++ even after several years of using it, you're being pretty optimistic. There is a big difference between grasping the basics of a language and knowing it well enough to avoid its various pitfalls e.g. object slicing or non-virtual destructors in C++.
To get to the level where you can write good C++ takes more than a fortnight, if you (or anybody for that matter) could get through the right books (Stroustrup, Meyers x 3, Sutter x 2, Alexandrescu) and assimilate all of the knowledge they contain in a fortnight I'd be pretty impressed.
Some while ago I was working on a project and needed to gather some information about the CPU in a system and its particular capabilities.
As a starting point, I took a look at some example source code published by Intel and found that it would not check for the capabilities I was looking for if the CPU was not an Intel CPU, i.e. it searched for the "GenuineIntel" string and if it didn't find it, the code reported that those features were not there.
I wrote my own code and made sure that my code would work on AMD, Intel or VIA CPUs, the CPUID instruction is designed to tell you not just what the capabilities of the CPU are but also can tell you what features the CPUID function can report. Checking for a "GenuineIntel" string is just plain lazy programming at best and anti-competitive practice at worse.
There are issues with solar power. For example, I like to use lights in my house at night, when its dark, i.e. when the sun has set and the solar panels don't work. Solar panels are additional infrastructure and batteries are inefficient, and the industrial processes for producing both have the potential to be "not very clean".
You didn't mention either hydro or wind power either, they can both be clean alternatives.
One of the reasons that x86 is able to perform as well as it does is its code density, that is a measure of how small a number of instructions (and the memory you need to store them) is compared to the work they can do.
RISC architectures don't give very good code density, so ARM have their ARM Thumb compressed instruction set, thats the way the embedded processors acheive good power efficiency, by cutting down the amount of memory traffic that instruction requests generate.
You can think of x86 as a way to compress the storage needed to contain the equivilent RISC instructions needed to perform the same work, that means that you make better use of available memory bandwidth and caches etc, your memory is vastly slower than the processor so you've got to make use of its bandwidth efficiently.
Assuming the price of your gasoline doesn't change when it goes from 100% to a 85/15 mix.....
$3.20 / $3.99 = 0.80
What you're saying is that when you dilute gasoline down to 85% with ethanol, it then only contains 80% of the energy that it contained before you diluted it, due to the ethanol's lower power density.
You're actually saying that ethanol has a negative energy density.
You need to do more than just shield the cockpit. Every wire that runs along the length of the plane is a potential aerial, it could pick up the wi-fi signal and carry it to somewhere where it can cause problems.
The ILS system (or modern equivilent) is what is most susceptable to interference, thats the system that lands the plane, it can land a plane when the conditions are so bad that the pilot can't see the runway. Modern planes land themselves pretty much, they follow a radio signal to the end of the runway. If the ILS signal is interfered with at the wrong time the plane might not land on the runway, it could overshoot, undershoot or hit the ground in another expensive and embarrasing way.
The bulging capacitor problem was nothing to do with overclocking. Bulging capacitors was caused by substandard electrolyte in capacitors that broke down over time and became conductive.
I had a couple of Abit boards with dodgy caps, they made a sort of "phut" noise as the charged capacitor discharged itself through the electrolyte, thats why they bulged and leaked. New capacitors solved the problem, but I couldn't find new capacitors that were the same size and same rating as the originals, all of the ones that were the same rating were physically larger, that says the originals were undersized.
Slot A was the equivilent to Slot 1, which isn't mentioned here.
Often with Intel the older CPUs don't work in the newer motherboards even when the socket is the same, where as I can't recall that happening with any AMD motherboard I've ever had.
Cars available in the UK...
Toyota Prius 65mpg (Hybrid Petrol)
Citroen C4 HDI 65mpg (Diesel)
On the combined cycle test (Standard European fuel economy test), the two cars are equvilent. On highway, constant speed cruise the Prius has a petrol engine and an inefficient transmission, its at best as efficient as the equivilent petrol at cruise. The diesel is something like 25%-33% more efficient at cruise.
Why is nobody making a diesel hybrid?
My understanding of the dual core P4s is that they don't share their cache at all.
They are in fact 2 processor dies in one package, so functionally it is two separate chips rather than the AMD approach which is having a pair of processors with fast interconnects (faster than the FSB) between them.
I'm not sure how relevent this is to the debate about mobile dual core....
Someone who has coded in VB.Net for years would be a far better choice for a Managed C++.Net project than someone who has programmed in C++ on another platform for years
Actually thats not at all true. I'm a C++ programmer and have used Win32 and MFC over a number of years. When I first started using
Programmers make mistakes, the mistakes have to be found and fixed. Burying your head in the sand doesn't help. I was once told that a successful test is one that finds a fault, a test that finds no faults serves no purpose.
Keep him away from anything mission critical!
Catalysts have very little effect on particulate emmissions, they only have a real affect on gaseous emmisions.
There is a good reason to remove catalysts from engines because they add to the CO2 emissions and cause more fuel consumption. The model of car I have didn't originally have a catalyst, offical fuel consumption 43mpg, later models were fitted with a catalyst and EGR and fuel consumption falls to 40mpg. Catalysts trade CO2 emissions for CO, NOx and HC emmissions. If car engines could be made cleaner so that they don't need catalysts at all that would be closer to the ideal solution.
Tell your parents to switch off at the wall instead.
Replacing a wall socket switche is cheaper than replacing a TV, even if you have to get an electrician in to do it.
Not only would the device STILL be wasting electricity by going to standby power levels instead of turning off completely but you'd be using an inefficent method of storing the power too.
In the UK we've got switched power sockets on our walls, but they don't switch the earth so if you turn your PC off at the wall its turned off but still earthed, i.e. no static when upgrading.
Thats not a backhoe, http://www.middaggs.co.uk/middaggs/products_and_se rvices/operated_plant_hire/jcb_3cx_highqlty.jpeg this is a backhoe.
Its always puzzled me why the US backhoe loaders are different to the ones we get in the UK. That one pictured, is a JCB 3CX, the back arm can be slid from side to side, thats handy if you need to dig a trench next to a wall. The JCB pictured also has a 7 in 1 bucket and an extending back arm which the one pictured in the parent post doesn't have.
The US style jacks give better stability, I suppose but they dont do a lot for versatility or compactness.
I'm afraid you can't do that, not once you're selling it or somebody else is.
Once you start selling something you can't retrospectively patent it.
I've seen the Viper video too, the reason he goes off the cliff is that he locks the wheels which means he can't steer. At the point of going off the cliff he wasn't actually going to fast for the corner, ABS OR manual cadence braking (taking your foot off the brake pedal) would have saved the car.
ABS can shorten stopping distances, most noticable on wet tarmac, but that wasnt why it was designed. ABS is all about control.
On snow, ABS can actually lengthen stopping distances. Without ABS on snow, you can lock up the wheels and the car will pile up snow in front of the wheels rather than driving over it. When its slippery this sort of snow plough effect can be more significant in stopping the car than the friction between rubber and road. Snow is the ONLY time you'd want to be able to disable the ABS on your car, and other time you're not doing anything useful by turning it off.
That article is not entirely correct.
What happened was that the engineers did the test themselves first before the TV cameras arrives, to make sure that it would all go to plan, they didn't want to embarrass themselves. What they realised was that the system didn't work so they decided to fake the test for the TV cameras. They had to brake manually but with the smoke, they obviously couldn't see the car in front so they placed markers down so the drivers knew when to brake. The markers they used were pieces of wood placed on the road, the idea being that the driver would feel the bump as the car drove over it. The problem was that the S Class Mercedes has suspension that is good at absorbing bumps so that one of the drivers missed his marker when the cameras were filming, hence the collision.