1. Car parks during the day have cars parked on them. Cars are packed densely. Cars on roads are actually only a passing phenomenon unless they're stuck in a jam (hint, don't install these panels in area prone to jams). 2. Therefore, you NEED the panels above the cars to generate meaningful power. 3. Also, it has a shading benefit. Which keeps cars cool. Also keeps patron dry. 4. And you can leave gaps for natural downlighting. 5. The structural cost will be cheaper for a giant solar carport than over-road structures. 6. All that stuff about tax perks Firethorn wrote.
So yeah, more car parks should have solar car ports. It's a win-win really, a no brainer.
There are many many many more miles of road than car park available, and they are all fairly similar. They require no supports, just glue. Mass production of the entire installation works, whereas the solar car port requires a different architectural design for every carpark (and maybe planning permission, etc).
Well this is hardly going to be the point in time where it turns from an idea on paper into 1000km installed.
What is unsuccessful, for a start? Only supplying 3m people? Or failing to generate any power 5 years down the line because of damage/dirt/unforeseen issues?
How much does a panel of this stuff cost? How many people are needed to install it (a truck of panels and glue, and a couple of people?). Are these roads due renovation anyway (massive teams of people and equipment)? Even if the power generation fails, the harder glass surface might last twice as long as tarmac, saving money.
But I'll truly believe it when I see it working. I want it to succeed, not fail because naysayers shoot it down before it's had a chance.
Additionally, if you were sourcing these panels for your road (assuming a new road or road renewal project) then you would not need to finish the traditional road with the smooth top layers of tarmac. You can do the coarse tarmac sublayer, and then use the glue/mortar to attach the panels. Given the time it takes to roll that top layer totally smooth, I don't think that attaching panels is going to be a major issue.
And for road renewals, you could get rid of the whole renewal cycle. No more tarmac scraping. No more road closures (just deploy overnight, stick a ramp at the working front for the day). Just fill the major holes and stick the panels on top (I presume you'll still need to install a power conduit in the road somehow, but that's going to be minor, and could be shared with utilities in a sensibly designed rollout).
The best thing is that someone is going to do it, so we'll have real world data on the system's effectiveness in a real world setting, and this will be done at the cost of the French.
I presume the snow plow could also leave about an inch of snow and have an integrated blower or series of brushes to blow/sweep the remaining snow away.
Or that one inch of snow is drivable, whereas what was there before wasn't.
Or these panels will not be used in areas where snow really happens, and road salt/grit is enough for cold nights.
If this textured glass is harder overall than road surface, then will it last longer? A typical road needs to be resurfaced quite often, could this halve the resurfacing incidents? If so, it could save a lot of money as a side-benefit.
Does the road surface have an adverse effect on tyres? What about snow chains? And other metallic scrapey things?
Yeah, they're doing Design Pattern Analysis (or similar) alongside analysing binary metadata, how the software behaves acts as a fingerprint to the coder who wrote it. Strip everything from those naughty binary executables people!
Ultimately, I somehow doubt that in a small application the binary can actually distinguish the author that precisely. There are only so many coding behaviour styles and patterns.
I think the best way to enforce further evolution for humanity is to introduce a form of artificial selection.
In this case, killing dumb people. Just as the weak one is sacrificed to the lion, shall the dumb one be sacrificed to the... well, maybe we could televise that.
If, in any given year, you are in the bottom 1% of usefulness (criteria to be determined, but maybe appearing on daytime TV will count), you will get 'reaped'. That should provide a good incentive to improve oneself, and hence improve society. Independent thinking would develop as people self educated, critical thinking, useful thinking. Civilisation would soar higher on a bedrock of televised death.
I would call this process 'centimation', the 100th's version of decimation.
This system isn't monitoring you 24/7. It detects accidents, presumably via a set of rules, and only when they are triggered does this system kick in.
IME most adults are just overgrown children who don't know what's best for them (and good for them being like that!) and they make terrible decisions.
And this system either is for your own good (you crashed and are 'bleeding out'), or for society's good (you hit someone/thing, and they need help ; no point running from the scene because you know this will happen).
Note that many cars will keep a history of your driving, replayable, in case you have an accident. Many people choose to install car cams that do the same, out of their own choice, because it actually protects them in the case of disputes.
one of my college buddies was killed hit by one of them and left to die in ditch.
And this feature would have sent the GPS coordinates of the collision to the authorities who could have gone to help and not "left to die in ditch".
Assuming the hit and run driver was suspicious in the check-up call, anyway.
In Britain the number of speed bumps and potholes would make this feature worthless, unfortunately. Although I'm guessing it also monitors bumper hits as well as sudden slowdowns and other behaviour indicative of an accident. I don't know what data gets sent to the operator, but if it is something like "bumper hit something at 50mph" then there's probably reasonable suspicion to override whatever the drive says anyway.
The article indicates that there are checks and balances on the system so it isn't usable for tracking purposes. Officially. Police can't search a database looking for cars within a geographic area at a certain time, as that database doesn't exist.
Chances are you will own: a spare SD card, a spare keyboard, a spare mouse, an old monitor (if you don't use a TV), and even an old USB hub.
The adaptors are included in a £3 add-on pack you can get at one of the UK retailers, if you need them. I've also seen a £4 case too already.
Other Raspberry Pis also need an SD card, a keyboard, a mouse, and a monitor. You get the USB hub and ethernet built in, but not WiFi or Bluetooth.
Give it a month and someone will make a PiZero format powered USB hub that stacks under this board and provides several needed ports and functionalities. Indeed I think it is a shame that this PiZero actually uses micro-usb ports, I think headers would have been more useful.
As an aside, I hope that the next "Big Pi" has built in WiFi and Bluetooth.
For example security related answers date really badly, and I'm sure we all agree that we don't want developers coming along and developing something around what was common practice five years ago (e.g., SHA-1). I think there needs to be some form of expiration that can be set, so that people can see that an answer, or full set of answers, is not to be trusted.
They _want_ people who arn't completely broke but can't afford the credit so they'll keep making minimum payments forever.
Of course. It comes down to affordability, and they want people to max out their credit to the point where they can barely make the minimum payments. I bet they call this a "sweet spot of consumer debt".
For example, once you have a bunch of credit card debt, you will realise at some point that the minimum payments are weighing you down, and you will consider maybe getting a long-term loan to consolidate the debt to make things more affordable. E.g., 30K of credit card debt might have a minimum repayment of 700 per month, a 30K 10 year loan at 10% could reduce that to 400 per month (don't worry about the total repayable here, this is about month-to-month affordability). You'd be 300 per month better off, you could use that to clear other commitments.
However, you will not be able to get the loan, because they take your existing credit commitments (the ones you want to pay off) into account to see if you can afford it. I.e., "Can you afford X (700) + Y (400)" each month, when the reality is you would only be paying Y. This is all baked into the credit assessment system, it's all based on affordability (and not the amount of debt you have already). And they don't trust you to not blow the Y on hookers and gaming PCs instead of clearing X, yet they will not offer a service to directly pay off the consolidated debt themselves. If you're at your affordability limit at 700, there's no way you can afford 1100, so they fail you, consistently.
So it's a multi-year game to get out of a bad debt situation. You need to get any type of loan, over a long term, to reduce the monthly payments as I gave an example of above. But your low credit score means you get high rates. Regardless, once you have it and clear some credit card debt (settle the highest rate accounts in order, preferably), it theoretically increases your credit score because you can technically afford more debt repayments each month (!). Of course, you should use the improved score to get a lower-rate loan to pay off the first loan and any other credit card debt you have still. This takes a long time of juggling, and 0% offer credit cards.
On the other hand, they arn't forcing people to use their credit cards beyond their means. Personally I've managed to never pay interest on any of mine.
So yeah, a good lesson is to not get into debt in the first place, and never have to learn the above. But that doesn't happen all the time - debt can happen for any reason that's not necessarily the fault of the debtor (e.g., in the US - medical bills). So you max out three credit cards, and then you're in the shit, even if you have assets, a good wage, etc. And the system does feel like it's set up like a Sarlac Pit - easy to fall into, hard to get out.
Other rules: always pay secured debt (set the payment date to your wage payment date if possible) before unsecured debt. Always pay the highest rate debt off first, if you have to choose. Be proactive when you see a problem developing, sort it out before you hit the affordability ceiling detailed above. Any step to reducing monthly outlay is better than sitting worrying about whether or not to accept that loan offer that you feel is at a rather high rate (but don't accept one with poor early repayment penalties) but would still reduce your monthly outgoings significantly.
If you'll be in monetary pain for a year, noodles and pasta and rice all the time is a reasonable penalty for the short period of time. If you'll be in monetary pain for five years, etc, then plan in some contingency for regular fun and nice meals, drinks, etc.
Only because AMD stopped at 512 shaders on their APUs, because of memory bandwidth limitations making it pointless to include more. Additionally, being stuck on 28nm didn't help with scaling or power use (although Carrizo does a very good job to be competitive with 14nm Intel chips).
Intel bypassed that by including a very large on-die memory so they could expand their GPU further and get more performance. This comes at a cost - price.
In this case, running on a 22-core Xeon chip. You won't get 29x-51x faster on your quad-core Skylake.
I.e., most of the speed-up is from multi-threading and use of AVX. Which I'm a little surprised that LLVMPipe didn't have - but then again, it probably wasn't too important at the time, and correctness was most important.
As suspected from early results yesterday, the takeaway from Morrison and Evans' videos today seems to be that while intense cases like synthetic Geekbench tests designed to push devices to their limits can reveal significant differences in battery life between devices using the two chips, real-world impacts are much smaller and are likely to be unnoticeable to many users.
Then GIF is pretty much the worst encoding mechanism to use. Yeah, I know it's "art" or "pretentious wankery", but it's a poor showcase of technology.
Here's the Amstrad CPC 464 BASIC version (I should RENUM it). This has far far far denser information encoding. Yeah, I know the font is different. Maybe the font is the entire point of this piece of art.
10 N = 1 : REM 40-bit floating point number - probably should use a few integer numbers instead to ensure the count works properly - exercise left to the reader 20 GOSUB 100 30 EVERY 30000 GOSUB 100 : REM 50 Hz counter * 60 seconds * 10 minutes 40 GOTO 40 100 CLS 110 LOCATE 20, 12 : REM We could do something about the length of the number to centre it better 120 PRINT N 130 N = N + 1 140 RETURN
Which is odd, because for Cardholder Not Present, you need to know the card's house number and postcode, as well as the CVV, for the transaction to be approved. That was put in place in the UK about 12 years ago. I know many online retailers only require the CVV once when registering the card (Amazon, Paypal, etc), but you would then also need to access the attackee's amazon account, change the delivery address...
Contactless is great in use... but yeah, if someone nicks your card they can go on a contactless spree until they get the very low frequency pin code confirmation security check.
But the mugger will have to force the pin out of you. And hope you don't cancel the card before they get to use it.
Or forge a signature, as this system appears to be implemented in this case - I presume the signature is encoded on the card chip and only visible to the cashier? Dunno how that's meant to work if the user can forge the signature from a physical signature on the card.
A retailer can tell you they're charging $10 but actually bill $1000.
How hard is it to verify the amount on the screen when tapping in your pin? Or is the American system done by the cashier entirely, because it's too hard for typical Americans to cope with?
Slashdot Mirror
1. Car parks during the day have cars parked on them. Cars are packed densely. Cars on roads are actually only a passing phenomenon unless they're stuck in a jam (hint, don't install these panels in area prone to jams).
2. Therefore, you NEED the panels above the cars to generate meaningful power.
3. Also, it has a shading benefit. Which keeps cars cool. Also keeps patron dry.
4. And you can leave gaps for natural downlighting.
5. The structural cost will be cheaper for a giant solar carport than over-road structures.
6. All that stuff about tax perks Firethorn wrote.
So yeah, more car parks should have solar car ports. It's a win-win really, a no brainer.
There are many many many more miles of road than car park available, and they are all fairly similar. They require no supports, just glue. Mass production of the entire installation works, whereas the solar car port requires a different architectural design for every carpark (and maybe planning permission, etc).
Well this is hardly going to be the point in time where it turns from an idea on paper into 1000km installed.
What is unsuccessful, for a start? Only supplying 3m people? Or failing to generate any power 5 years down the line because of damage/dirt/unforeseen issues?
How much does a panel of this stuff cost? How many people are needed to install it (a truck of panels and glue, and a couple of people?). Are these roads due renovation anyway (massive teams of people and equipment)? Even if the power generation fails, the harder glass surface might last twice as long as tarmac, saving money.
But I'll truly believe it when I see it working. I want it to succeed, not fail because naysayers shoot it down before it's had a chance.
Additionally, if you were sourcing these panels for your road (assuming a new road or road renewal project) then you would not need to finish the traditional road with the smooth top layers of tarmac. You can do the coarse tarmac sublayer, and then use the glue/mortar to attach the panels. Given the time it takes to roll that top layer totally smooth, I don't think that attaching panels is going to be a major issue.
And for road renewals, you could get rid of the whole renewal cycle. No more tarmac scraping. No more road closures (just deploy overnight, stick a ramp at the working front for the day). Just fill the major holes and stick the panels on top (I presume you'll still need to install a power conduit in the road somehow, but that's going to be minor, and could be shared with utilities in a sensibly designed rollout).
The best thing is that someone is going to do it, so we'll have real world data on the system's effectiveness in a real world setting, and this will be done at the cost of the French.
I presume the snow plow could also leave about an inch of snow and have an integrated blower or series of brushes to blow/sweep the remaining snow away.
Or that one inch of snow is drivable, whereas what was there before wasn't.
Or these panels will not be used in areas where snow really happens, and road salt/grit is enough for cold nights.
Other questions ...
If this textured glass is harder overall than road surface, then will it last longer? A typical road needs to be resurfaced quite often, could this halve the resurfacing incidents? If so, it could save a lot of money as a side-benefit.
Does the road surface have an adverse effect on tyres?
What about snow chains? And other metallic scrapey things?
The A1170 high end Opteron has a 32W TDP, and two built-in 10GigE ports, for under $150 (expected SoC price).
So how is that expensive per port, in terms of power consumption, etc?
Yeah, they're doing Design Pattern Analysis (or similar) alongside analysing binary metadata, how the software behaves acts as a fingerprint to the coder who wrote it. Strip everything from those naughty binary executables people!
Ultimately, I somehow doubt that in a small application the binary can actually distinguish the author that precisely. There are only so many coding behaviour styles and patterns.
I think the best way to enforce further evolution for humanity is to introduce a form of artificial selection.
In this case, killing dumb people. Just as the weak one is sacrificed to the lion, shall the dumb one be sacrificed to the ... well, maybe we could televise that.
If, in any given year, you are in the bottom 1% of usefulness (criteria to be determined, but maybe appearing on daytime TV will count), you will get 'reaped'. That should provide a good incentive to improve oneself, and hence improve society. Independent thinking would develop as people self educated, critical thinking, useful thinking. Civilisation would soar higher on a bedrock of televised death.
I would call this process 'centimation', the 100th's version of decimation.
This system isn't monitoring you 24/7. It detects accidents, presumably via a set of rules, and only when they are triggered does this system kick in.
IME most adults are just overgrown children who don't know what's best for them (and good for them being like that!) and they make terrible decisions.
And this system either is for your own good (you crashed and are 'bleeding out'), or for society's good (you hit someone/thing, and they need help ; no point running from the scene because you know this will happen).
Note that many cars will keep a history of your driving, replayable, in case you have an accident. Many people choose to install car cams that do the same, out of their own choice, because it actually protects them in the case of disputes.
I'm guessing OnStar can only rely on accelerometer/speed measurements.
A built-in system can also check for collision information - pressure on the bumpers, etc, to improve the false positive rate.
It took a few seconds for me to realise that this wasn't a sarcastic comment about US gun laws.
one of my college buddies was killed hit by one of them and left to die in ditch.
And this feature would have sent the GPS coordinates of the collision to the authorities who could have gone to help and not "left to die in ditch".
Assuming the hit and run driver was suspicious in the check-up call, anyway.
In Britain the number of speed bumps and potholes would make this feature worthless, unfortunately. Although I'm guessing it also monitors bumper hits as well as sudden slowdowns and other behaviour indicative of an accident. I don't know what data gets sent to the operator, but if it is something like "bumper hit something at 50mph" then there's probably reasonable suspicion to override whatever the drive says anyway.
The article indicates that there are checks and balances on the system so it isn't usable for tracking purposes. Officially. Police can't search a database looking for cars within a geographic area at a certain time, as that database doesn't exist.
Some people want ethernet, some people want WiFi, some people want Bluetooth, some people want 4 USB ports.
If you want all of these, then maybe a full size Pi is the best option from the beginning.
Otherwise we're talking about a £4 board, a £1 micro-USB to Male USB adaptor, and the comms dongle of your choice.
You might not even need the adapter - http://www.amazon.co.uk/100Mbp...
A headless server connected to your home router for £6.49 + SD card + PSU (you probably already have these).
Chances are you will own: a spare SD card, a spare keyboard, a spare mouse, an old monitor (if you don't use a TV), and even an old USB hub.
The adaptors are included in a £3 add-on pack you can get at one of the UK retailers, if you need them. I've also seen a £4 case too already.
Other Raspberry Pis also need an SD card, a keyboard, a mouse, and a monitor. You get the USB hub and ethernet built in, but not WiFi or Bluetooth.
Give it a month and someone will make a PiZero format powered USB hub that stacks under this board and provides several needed ports and functionalities. Indeed I think it is a shame that this PiZero actually uses micro-usb ports, I think headers would have been more useful.
As an aside, I hope that the next "Big Pi" has built in WiFi and Bluetooth.
I have noticed this too.
For example security related answers date really badly, and I'm sure we all agree that we don't want developers coming along and developing something around what was common practice five years ago (e.g., SHA-1). I think there needs to be some form of expiration that can be set, so that people can see that an answer, or full set of answers, is not to be trusted.
Clearly a massive breach of personal data. All to get a few dollars by selling it.
Luckily restricted to 12 organisations, but who can guarantee that they will not abuse it or a member of staff hasn't leaked it?
The state should be providing free identity theft insurance to every citizen as a result.
Also, why the hell is a gun magazine buying these details (even the more restricted version), and why are they even allowed to?
They _want_ people who arn't completely broke but can't afford the credit so they'll keep making minimum payments forever.
Of course. It comes down to affordability, and they want people to max out their credit to the point where they can barely make the minimum payments. I bet they call this a "sweet spot of consumer debt".
For example, once you have a bunch of credit card debt, you will realise at some point that the minimum payments are weighing you down, and you will consider maybe getting a long-term loan to consolidate the debt to make things more affordable. E.g., 30K of credit card debt might have a minimum repayment of 700 per month, a 30K 10 year loan at 10% could reduce that to 400 per month (don't worry about the total repayable here, this is about month-to-month affordability). You'd be 300 per month better off, you could use that to clear other commitments.
However, you will not be able to get the loan, because they take your existing credit commitments (the ones you want to pay off) into account to see if you can afford it. I.e., "Can you afford X (700) + Y (400)" each month, when the reality is you would only be paying Y. This is all baked into the credit assessment system, it's all based on affordability (and not the amount of debt you have already). And they don't trust you to not blow the Y on hookers and gaming PCs instead of clearing X, yet they will not offer a service to directly pay off the consolidated debt themselves. If you're at your affordability limit at 700, there's no way you can afford 1100, so they fail you, consistently.
So it's a multi-year game to get out of a bad debt situation. You need to get any type of loan, over a long term, to reduce the monthly payments as I gave an example of above. But your low credit score means you get high rates. Regardless, once you have it and clear some credit card debt (settle the highest rate accounts in order, preferably), it theoretically increases your credit score because you can technically afford more debt repayments each month (!). Of course, you should use the improved score to get a lower-rate loan to pay off the first loan and any other credit card debt you have still. This takes a long time of juggling, and 0% offer credit cards.
On the other hand, they arn't forcing people to use their credit cards beyond their means. Personally I've managed to never pay interest on any of mine.
So yeah, a good lesson is to not get into debt in the first place, and never have to learn the above. But that doesn't happen all the time - debt can happen for any reason that's not necessarily the fault of the debtor (e.g., in the US - medical bills). So you max out three credit cards, and then you're in the shit, even if you have assets, a good wage, etc. And the system does feel like it's set up like a Sarlac Pit - easy to fall into, hard to get out.
Other rules: always pay secured debt (set the payment date to your wage payment date if possible) before unsecured debt. Always pay the highest rate debt off first, if you have to choose. Be proactive when you see a problem developing, sort it out before you hit the affordability ceiling detailed above. Any step to reducing monthly outlay is better than sitting worrying about whether or not to accept that loan offer that you feel is at a rather high rate (but don't accept one with poor early repayment penalties) but would still reduce your monthly outgoings significantly.
If you'll be in monetary pain for a year, noodles and pasta and rice all the time is a reasonable penalty for the short period of time. If you'll be in monetary pain for five years, etc, then plan in some contingency for regular fun and nice meals, drinks, etc.
Only because AMD stopped at 512 shaders on their APUs, because of memory bandwidth limitations making it pointless to include more. Additionally, being stuck on 28nm didn't help with scaling or power use (although Carrizo does a very good job to be competitive with 14nm Intel chips).
Intel bypassed that by including a very large on-die memory so they could expand their GPU further and get more performance. This comes at a cost - price.
In this case, running on a 22-core Xeon chip. You won't get 29x-51x faster on your quad-core Skylake.
I.e., most of the speed-up is from multi-threading and use of AVX. Which I'm a little surprised that LLVMPipe didn't have - but then again, it probably wasn't too important at the time, and correctness was most important.
http://www.macrumors.com/2015/...
As suspected from early results yesterday, the takeaway from Morrison and Evans' videos today seems to be that while intense cases like synthetic Geekbench tests designed to push devices to their limits can reveal significant differences in battery life between devices using the two chips, real-world impacts are much smaller and are likely to be unnoticeable to many users.
Then GIF is pretty much the worst encoding mechanism to use. Yeah, I know it's "art" or "pretentious wankery", but it's a poor showcase of technology.
Here's the Amstrad CPC 464 BASIC version (I should RENUM it). This has far far far denser information encoding. Yeah, I know the font is different. Maybe the font is the entire point of this piece of art.
10 N = 1 : REM 40-bit floating point number - probably should use a few integer numbers instead to ensure the count works properly - exercise left to the reader
20 GOSUB 100
30 EVERY 30000 GOSUB 100 : REM 50 Hz counter * 60 seconds * 10 minutes
40 GOTO 40
100 CLS
110 LOCATE 20, 12 : REM We could do something about the length of the number to centre it better
120 PRINT N
130 N = N + 1
140 RETURN
Fact is that chip and pin has fraud at around 0.7p per £100, and other methods have about 7.5p per £100. It's far far safer.
Just because someone doesn't understand how it works and rants online doesn't make it a valid resource to link to.
If you write your pin on your card, you are a stupid idiot and deserve to lose your money.
Referring to something like this? http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/m...
Which is odd, because for Cardholder Not Present, you need to know the card's house number and postcode, as well as the CVV, for the transaction to be approved. That was put in place in the UK about 12 years ago. I know many online retailers only require the CVV once when registering the card (Amazon, Paypal, etc), but you would then also need to access the attackee's amazon account, change the delivery address ...
And for cloned cards, you need to know the pin.
Something isn't right with the story.
Contactless is great in use ... but yeah, if someone nicks your card they can go on a contactless spree until they get the very low frequency pin code confirmation security check.
You can still be mugged for the card.
But the mugger will have to force the pin out of you. And hope you don't cancel the card before they get to use it.
Or forge a signature, as this system appears to be implemented in this case - I presume the signature is encoded on the card chip and only visible to the cashier? Dunno how that's meant to work if the user can forge the signature from a physical signature on the card.
A retailer can tell you they're charging $10 but actually bill $1000.
How hard is it to verify the amount on the screen when tapping in your pin? Or is the American system done by the cashier entirely, because it's too hard for typical Americans to cope with?