You fix things before they break to interrupt the cycle of cascading failures - work shocks contributing to added suspension damage, replace batteries before they eat alternators, making sure sensor issues that cause check engine lights are repaired, etc. Many of the items you cite (power lock failures, interior issues) can be dealt with by, well, buying a brand that doesn't have those issues.
It is almost always cheaper to fix the car if you factor in all of the variables. A $1500 repair on a car worth $0 is a good buy if it runs for a year; the depreciation alone on a new vehicle is many times that, never mind financing charges, and you've accomplished your mission - having transportation.
Wanting a new car is fine, but I've seen friends pay for three or four vehicles in the timespan I've had mine. My truck (07 Honda Ridgeline) still looks and runs brand new, and I'll easily get another 10 years of service from it. Even if I had to replace the drivetrain completely in 5 years.. it's the economical choice.
You're a sucker if you're perpetually buying new cars. Maintain them properly and save some money.
There was a standard solution for decades, and the stupid manufacturers integrate everything.
It's almost new car time.. 3D printing a replacement dash and integrating a AppRadio or other alternative may be the only possibility in a lot of cases.
The real pain comes when they integrate things you need, like maintenance calculators and schedules.. car makers shouldn't get involved with consumer electronics.
My wife drives a 1998 Subaru Forester to school every day. Do you still use.. or even own.. any electronics from 1998?
I am drafting my complaint to the Privacy commissioner, and you should too. The commissioner has real teeth and Bell will definately have to defend what they're doing. As a regulated utility they do not have right to unilaterally foist this upon people. It's repugnant and evil.
The terms are really horrible. Also, the fine print says they're going to collect and use it anyway - you can opt out of the ads. I don't have Bell TV or Phone - just internet - so how, exactly, do they intend to serve me ads?
Get angry about this. The commisioner can't do anything without complaints. Give them some.
If you can get to LEO, you have constructed an ICBM.
Why this may be a problem for state actors is left as an exercise to the reader.
If you've made actual progress, well - props. Find someone with deep pockets (Musk; Branson, ?) to provide legal help and legitimacy...just be aware that actions have consequences.
The transmission line tools are all there. I've done board up ARM designs in a basement, from the IC through to bootloading.
It wasn't wire wrap cheap, but it wasn't undoable, either. There are solid reference designs you work from. My budget was about $35,000 in 2005.
What's different today is documentation is very good, everywhere, there are lots of reference designs, and places to get help. If the platform you're working on doesn't have those, you go somewhere else.
The Pi has a full set of open designs. Tell me where you were going to find those in the 90's?
If I had such a diagnosis I would likely dramatically alter my estate planning strategies. I can see several scenarios where that information would be very useful.
The 23andme kit is on my list of things to purchase. I do wish it could test for more things, but I suppose that's in the works.
How many PhD's do you think it takes to design a chip?
A long time ago, I wrote some code to generate VHDL from a basic neural network framework. The code was trained on a PC then migrated to compatible VHDL and microcode. The VHDL was then synthesized and loaded onto Xilinx FPGA automatically.
That was not complicated to do ten years ago, and I am far from an expert. The performance gains were epic, although, training is complicated.
Methinks that Qualcomm (based on their reported revenues is quite able to do this. "Revenues: $3.88 billion, up 46 percent year-over-year and 16 percent sequentially."
What's changed is the tech is cheap and fast enough.. it wasn't, ten years ago. The only surprising thing to me is that you can't get these chips now.
3G systems use licensed spectrum. The power levels are much higher, they're typically in good spots for coverage, and the receive antennas are high gain (and very expensive). As nobody else is using the bands, the noise floor is very low. This represents much of their advantage.
The bruhaha over 700MHz is that it does travel very effectively through things, but this isn't always what you want for high bandwidth. More APs is better as this enables you to reuse spectrum. Further propagation increases the problems from self-interference, etc.
Open reference designs are invaluable.. they allow integration of this into an existing design or SoC, but more interestingly, provide an easy platform to customize at the hardware level.
Monitoring is not the same thing as analyzing.. but I am quite certain I know where my packets are headed - at least when they're sent from my gateway. That's how the internet works.
I've got friends who have 2 and 3 year olds that can use iPads. (in suitably armoured cases).
They play with other things, but they can quite proficiently use the tablet - and in at one case, could do so before they could talk.
In one case, the kid talks to her dad all the time on the iPad in FaceTime. That's because Dad has to travel to make money - and that's just a reality. Props to him for having kids. The world needs more smart people.
These kids will turn out fine. A phone isn't going to fuck up a kid.
My advice: Get your kit a tablet and put one of those armored goo-tolerant cases on it. If there's times when they shouldn't use it, explain it's not available. This seems very straightforward.
Classical kid-activities and technology are not mutually exclusive sets.
At one point, when everything you do to stop global warming fails, you'll come to realize that perhaps there are forces far greater than man at work.
That's loser talk. Your brain is the most complicated, organized structure in the known universe.
Properly realized there is potentially no greater force in the entire universe than sentient, self-learning brains. We have several billion of them on this planet and I have zero doubt that properly motivated, planet scale engineering and far beyond are well within our capabilities.
Failure to accept man's potential and the responsibility that comes with it is the only arrogance here.
Nuclear technologies can keep the party going indefinitely.
The more human genetic capital we have, the better, particularly if we can get education and literacy rates up. We need engineers and scientists to figure out fusion and other advanced energy sources.
We've already thrown the dice; the easy energy is gone; might as well see it through. Just need to start... now.
Science has data and experiments. There's data to demonstrate there may be changes occurring, but there's no model backed by experimental results to explain why that may be. The earth's climate system is very complex, and it may be impossible to model in any sort of long term fashion.
The inability to model drives the risk. We don't know. The prudent thing is to reduce impact; sure. How do we best do that? More policy.
It is reasonable to hypothesize that human activity is causing the changes. Based on those assumptions it may be even be reasonable to implement policy to mitigate risks.
Work on modern fission designs should be happening now, and in sane countries, like China - it is, as fast as is possible.
That should be used to buy time to advance thorium and hopefully, fusion designs.
Shutting off Japan's nuclear industry so they can run the country off natural gas and diesel and coal - brilliant stuff. I will have to calculate what the total tonnage of co2 (and natural source radiation from coal burning) released is from those decisions.
I'll take a small risk of a localized disaster over a global one.
Mass adoption of nuclear energy is the only option.
The green crowd have fantasies of state taxation and control; the problem is enterprises see through this immediately and apply their financial resources to make sure it doesn't happen.
Brass tacks; modern civilization and economic growth needs high quality energy sources and has an accelerating demand for energy. The only fuel that provides thermodynamic high-quality energy for base load that we have available is carbon and nuclear. The energy requirements of our society are epic. They will become more epic in the future!
The green movement needs to realize that the driver for economic activity trumps everything. Period. The energy is required to sustain the society we live in. If there isn't a rapid move to nuclear, we are going to burn every drop of oil, every ton of coal, and every liter of natural gas. That's the path we're on now.
I have hopes that we'll be able to fix the mess later - with technology being driven by clean energy sources. We need a push to get fusion reactors figured out. We know how fusion works; it powers those bombs everyone forgets don't exist. If people are so in arms about nuclear energy, why are they not freaking out about the pre-packaged critical nuclear reactions sitting on top of fueled missiles, only under control of a computer to avert disaster?
The lack of understanding of thermodynamics and energy is really epic; people advocating for restricting co2 production just don't understand how much energy is required.
Eventually the planet is going to suffer a catastrophe. A caldera volcano will explode; an asteroid will strike. The climate will change in a catastrophic means, just as it has done over and over again in the geologic record.
The sooner we have unlimited amounts of clean energy on tap to fix things, the better. The answer is staring at us in the widespread adoption of nuclear energy.
Until then.. go away, get off my lawn, and I'll continue to vote for people with energy polices grounded in reality.
Slashdot Mirror
You're doing it wrong.
You fix things before they break to interrupt the cycle of cascading failures - work shocks contributing to added suspension damage, replace batteries before they eat alternators, making sure sensor issues that cause check engine lights are repaired, etc. Many of the items you cite (power lock failures, interior issues) can be dealt with by, well, buying a brand that doesn't have those issues.
It is almost always cheaper to fix the car if you factor in all of the variables. A $1500 repair on a car worth $0 is a good buy if it runs for a year; the depreciation alone on a new vehicle is many times that, never mind financing charges, and you've accomplished your mission - having transportation.
Wanting a new car is fine, but I've seen friends pay for three or four vehicles in the timespan I've had mine. My truck (07 Honda Ridgeline) still looks and runs brand new, and I'll easily get another 10 years of service from it. Even if I had to replace the drivetrain completely in 5 years.. it's the economical choice.
I keep cars 15 years. Modern cars are very good.
You're a sucker if you're perpetually buying new cars. Maintain them properly and save some money.
There was a standard solution for decades, and the stupid manufacturers integrate everything.
It's almost new car time .. 3D printing a replacement dash and integrating a AppRadio or other alternative may be the only possibility in a lot of cases.
The real pain comes when they integrate things you need, like maintenance calculators and schedules.. car makers shouldn't get involved with consumer electronics.
My wife drives a 1998 Subaru Forester to school every day. Do you still use .. or even own.. any electronics from 1998?
You can't opt out of the monitoring and profiling.
You can only opt out of ad delivery.
Yes, it's that evil.
I am drafting my complaint to the Privacy commissioner, and you should too. The commissioner has real teeth and Bell will definately have to defend what they're doing. As a regulated utility they do not have right to unilaterally foist this upon people. It's repugnant and evil.
http://www.priv.gc.ca/index_e.asp
The terms are really horrible. Also, the fine print says they're going to collect and use it anyway - you can opt out of the ads. I don't have Bell TV or Phone - just internet - so how, exactly, do they intend to serve me ads?
Get angry about this. The commisioner can't do anything without complaints. Give them some.
If you can get to LEO, you have constructed an ICBM.
Why this may be a problem for state actors is left as an exercise to the reader.
If you've made actual progress, well - props. Find someone with deep pockets (Musk; Branson, ?) to provide legal help and legitimacy. ..just be aware that actions have consequences.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Bull
Once you can print 3D metal cheap, that changes a lot of things.
Plastic, less so.
Bollocks.
The transmission line tools are all there. I've done board up ARM designs in a basement, from the IC through to bootloading.
It wasn't wire wrap cheap, but it wasn't undoable, either. There are solid reference designs you work from. My budget was about $35,000 in 2005.
What's different today is documentation is very good, everywhere, there are lots of reference designs, and places to get help. If the platform you're working on doesn't have those, you go somewhere else.
The Pi has a full set of open designs. Tell me where you were going to find those in the 90's?
If I had such a diagnosis I would likely dramatically alter my estate planning strategies. I can see several scenarios where that information would be very useful.
The 23andme kit is on my list of things to purchase. I do wish it could test for more things, but I suppose that's in the works.
Terrible for the client, maybe.
Terrible for the job security? Maybe not, under the right circumstances. Not everyone has lawyers to negotiate fat maintenance contracts.
Doesn't make it right, but just saying.
How many PhD's do you think it takes to design a chip?
A long time ago, I wrote some code to generate VHDL from a basic neural network framework. The code was trained on a PC then migrated to compatible VHDL and microcode. The VHDL was then synthesized and loaded onto Xilinx FPGA automatically.
That was not complicated to do ten years ago, and I am far from an expert. The performance gains were epic, although, training is complicated.
Methinks that Qualcomm (based on their reported revenues is quite able to do this. "Revenues: $3.88 billion, up 46 percent year-over-year and 16 percent sequentially."
What's changed is the tech is cheap and fast enough.. it wasn't, ten years ago. The only surprising thing to me is that you can't get these chips now.
3G systems use licensed spectrum. The power levels are much higher, they're typically in good spots for coverage, and the receive antennas are high gain (and very expensive). As nobody else is using the bands, the noise floor is very low. This represents much of their advantage.
The bruhaha over 700MHz is that it does travel very effectively through things, but this isn't always what you want for high bandwidth. More APs is better as this enables you to reuse spectrum. Further propagation increases the problems from self-interference, etc.
Open reference designs are invaluable.. they allow integration of this into an existing design or SoC, but more interestingly, provide an easy platform to customize at the hardware level.
Take advantage of the low prices to invest in energy producers..
I'd be interested in a high end watch with silent alert and biometric functions that communicated with my smartphone.
That'd be about it.
It's quite easy to monitor all traffic.
Monitoring is not the same thing as analyzing.. but I am quite certain I know where my packets are headed - at least when they're sent from my gateway. That's how the internet works.
I already monitor all the traffic into and out of my network - there's lots you have no idea about.
Has to be an appliance.. but that's cheap. Making it easy to understand might open quite a few people's eyes...
I'm probably done here if I have to look at that hipster nightmare they're trying to promote.
We should fork the code, go back to the old stuff, and skim the site automatically. Don't piss off the geeks.
I'd put $100 into a kickstarter to support that.
I've got friends who have 2 and 3 year olds that can use iPads. (in suitably armoured cases).
They play with other things, but they can quite proficiently use the tablet - and in at one case, could do so before they could talk.
In one case, the kid talks to her dad all the time on the iPad in FaceTime. That's because Dad has to travel to make money - and that's just a reality. Props to him for having kids. The world needs more smart people.
These kids will turn out fine. A phone isn't going to fuck up a kid.
My advice: Get your kit a tablet and put one of those armored goo-tolerant cases on it. If there's times when they shouldn't use it, explain it's not available. This seems very straightforward.
Classical kid-activities and technology are not mutually exclusive sets.
At one point, when everything you do to stop global warming fails, you'll come to realize that perhaps there are forces far greater than man at work.
That's loser talk. Your brain is the most complicated, organized structure in the known universe.
Properly realized there is potentially no greater force in the entire universe than sentient, self-learning brains. We have several billion of them on this planet and I have zero doubt that properly motivated, planet scale engineering and far beyond are well within our capabilities.
Failure to accept man's potential and the responsibility that comes with it is the only arrogance here.
Nuclear technologies can keep the party going indefinitely.
The more human genetic capital we have, the better, particularly if we can get education and literacy rates up. We need engineers and scientists to figure out fusion and other advanced energy sources.
We've already thrown the dice; the easy energy is gone; might as well see it through. Just need to start... now.
Perhaps, but policy impacts are things politicians can debate until they're blue in the face.
My problem is all this is being presented as science. It's not science. Worse, it is impacting what laypeople think science is!
This is something, but it isn't science.
Science has data and experiments. There's data to demonstrate there may be changes occurring, but there's no model backed by experimental results to explain why that may be. The earth's climate system is very complex, and it may be impossible to model in any sort of long term fashion.
The inability to model drives the risk. We don't know. The prudent thing is to reduce impact; sure. How do we best do that? More policy.
It is reasonable to hypothesize that human activity is causing the changes. Based on those assumptions it may be even be reasonable to implement policy to mitigate risks.
Don't front it as science, though. It's not.
I guess it's OK, so long as we only put thousands of potential super-critical reactions on top of missiles, then. My bad. :-)
Sure looks ready to me.
Work on modern fission designs should be happening now, and in sane countries, like China - it is, as fast as is possible.
That should be used to buy time to advance thorium and hopefully, fusion designs.
Shutting off Japan's nuclear industry so they can run the country off natural gas and diesel and coal - brilliant stuff. I will have to calculate what the total tonnage of co2 (and natural source radiation from coal burning) released is from those decisions.
I'll take a small risk of a localized disaster over a global one.
Mass adoption of nuclear energy is the only option.
The green crowd have fantasies of state taxation and control; the problem is enterprises see through this immediately and apply their financial resources to make sure it doesn't happen.
Brass tacks; modern civilization and economic growth needs high quality energy sources and has an accelerating demand for energy. The only fuel that provides thermodynamic high-quality energy for base load that we have available is carbon and nuclear. The energy requirements of our society are epic. They will become more epic in the future!
The green movement needs to realize that the driver for economic activity trumps everything. Period. The energy is required to sustain the society we live in. If there isn't a rapid move to nuclear, we are going to burn every drop of oil, every ton of coal, and every liter of natural gas. That's the path we're on now.
I have hopes that we'll be able to fix the mess later - with technology being driven by clean energy sources. We need a push to get fusion reactors figured out. We know how fusion works; it powers those bombs everyone forgets don't exist. If people are so in arms about nuclear energy, why are they not freaking out about the pre-packaged critical nuclear reactions sitting on top of fueled missiles, only under control of a computer to avert disaster?
The lack of understanding of thermodynamics and energy is really epic; people advocating for restricting co2 production just don't understand how much energy is required.
Eventually the planet is going to suffer a catastrophe. A caldera volcano will explode; an asteroid will strike. The climate will change in a catastrophic means, just as it has done over and over again in the geologic record.
The sooner we have unlimited amounts of clean energy on tap to fix things, the better. The answer is staring at us in the widespread adoption of nuclear energy.
Until then.. go away, get off my lawn, and I'll continue to vote for people with energy polices grounded in reality.