Right, so when a company end of lines a product they're criticised for not open sourcing it.
Now when a company open sources an end of lined product, they're "offloading another failing technology".
This is why companies don't give a fuck what the FOSS community thinks, because with the FOSS community you can never do anything right. See all the whinging about Android's open source initiatives for another fine example.
right. what, the ones where, just like trolltech and oracle doing qt4 and mysql doing a one-way push where you cannot truly contribute except as a paid-up slave^H^H^H^H^Hemployee, the product cannot truly be considered to be either "Open" or "Free"? have you actually looked at the number of lines of code involved? do you even understand that "Libre" is not just about the "Releasing Of Some Code" it is about developing and fostering an open, exciting and above-all *inclusive* community attitude?
do you understand that without a group of actual independent contributors or a means and a clear path by which random contributors can actually like... y'know... contribute - do you actually understand that without this absolutely critical critical means for people to actually contribute there *is* no "Software Libre", and no amount of renaming exercises as "Open" will ever change a proprietary product into a "Software Libre" one without also having a vibrant community around it.
i don't understand why people don't understand this. look at FreeDCE for example, or ISODE. have you even heard of ISODE 8.0? it's a full-on X500 Directory Services server, released _decades_ ago under a BSD-compatible license. it was free software way before anyone understood free software. but everyone rejected X500 in favour of "LDAP". then, of course, they went "shit - this LDAP stuff is shit! i know, let's extend it, that'll make it better, won't it?" and they've spent a good decade+ reimplementing X500 _back_ into LDAP, thus no longer making it "light"!
the point of mentioning FreeDCE and ISODE is that even releasing technically superior code as Free Software *doesn't* mean it's going to magically end up with a vibrant community based around it - hence the reason why adobe's hunting for victims to take FLEX off their hands. the problem is that they should have done this over 10 years ago, when FLEX was actually relevant.
now, if they released the source code of flash player as Free Software (so that gnash and swfdec could incorporate some missing features) now *that* would be interesting, and worthwhile: they still have a limited window of opportunity in which to do that. but, i believe it's far more likely that they'll just fail to take advantage of the opportunity until it's too late, there, too.
overall i'm looking at a company that's on its way out. by embracing HTML5 they have entered - late - a market they really don't understand, and do not have a big differentiator from absolutely anyone else in the HTML5 market. nobody buys PDF readers. nobody buys Flash Servers because you can get red5, rtmpy and others. time to die, Adobe. cut the losses, and shut up shop.
You realize that you're talking about lithium-metal right? All mainstream electric vehicles are using lithium-ion which is a different technology. A lithium-ion battery _will_not_ catch fire when exposed to air and water. Lithium-ion batteries will catch fire when heated to above around 120C which can happen by an internal short circuit, or if punctured by a piece of metal.
Stop spreading FUD. Lithium-ion batteries are much safer than lithium-metal batteries, which is why lithium-ion batteries are being used despite their lower energy density.
listen to yourself. stop spreading FUD... but you're ok with lithium-ion batteries exploding if short-circuited or heated to above 120C, mm?
at least with lead-acid cells you _only_ get warm acid thrown on your face if you short-circuit and boil them, which if you're desperate can be washed off with lots of water. you can't wash burning lithium off your face, can you.
so, thank you for the corrections - it allows me to more accurately state that, thanks to the use of lithium (in any form), death can be caused only by short-circuit or heating the cells above 120C rather than that the death can be caused by exposure to air and water.
i could go over everything but it's yes on all accounts to everything you've said:) so that's really appreciated. btw do you notice how there is a corresponding "suction" bit at the back of the lancia? airflow goes up over the spoiler, but that results in suction of the airflow (bernouilli effect) from underneath.
yes absolutely on the sportsbike engine and gearbox: i'm actually really looking forward to doing that version:)
yes on the FWD - we've picked the Suzuki Swift (aka Geo Metro) gearbox precisely for this reason: it's 21kg, it's 17in long, 13in high but only because of the clutch-plate - and in combination with an 8in x 8in BLDC motor you get something that's *only* 2ft wide but includes the differential built-in! amazing - and it came out of suzuki adapting a motorbike gearbox for the job.
gbrmh, thank you for these really valuable comments and links.
regarding the aerodynamics: it's because i had to place absolutely every single point and triangle using mm3d by hand! crazed as that sounds, it means i had to pay attention to every single aspect and detail, but yet it is still slowly morphing into something that resembles, at the base, a 2-seater canoe, and on the top a classic delta-wing.
also bear in mind that it came out of point-matching around photographs (front, side, top, back) where the original cardboard model had literally been sliced and hacked with an ultra-sharp serrated-edge tomato kitchen knife, and bits of replacement cardboard stuck on with tape! it's surprisingly effective.
after 150 years, the design of the lead-acid cell has not really been improved on. rainer partenan's nanotech aluminium-based battery which has (had) a 5x storage capacity improvement for its weight over NiMh was thoroughly discredited. research grants 15 years ago by the U.S. Govt were *only* given for batteries with a voltage over 2.0 volts, in order, one can only assume, to prevent and prohibit the funding and discovery of aluminium-based battery technology.
we therefore have to work with what we've got: it's no good saying "oh we have to wait yet _another_ decade or two until someone comes up with the goods" FUCK that, there are more ways than one to skin a cat, ok?
so the alternatives are to skin the vehicle down to an absolute minimum required, then make it *look* from the outside (for social acceptance as well as driving safety reasons) like it's a "full-on square back-sided car" jobbie. in other words, you stuff a massively-streamlined body inside an empty outer shell. this is the principle behind what i'm working on - http://lkcl.net/ev
it's _not_ all about the batteries. we _have_ all the pieces of the puzzle already - have done for over 5 years now. it's just that nobody's put them all together... yet.
innovation is virtually impossible for mass-production companies to "slot in" to the "efficiency engine". they literally can't do it. there are also legal issues that need to be taken into account, such as a guaranteed 7-year-supply of parts *after* the vehicle's *last* mass-production run is finished.
why am i not surprised! it's funny (not really) but this accident vindicates what i've been talking about. you _can't_ put a material that spontaneously catches fire when exposed to air and water (lithium) into a car! so you have to use "safe" non-explosive materials such as gasoline or diesel (no, you cannot set light to gasoline even with a naked flame, you have to vapourise it, mix it with air and hit it with a spark), and lead-acid for the batteries. that means that you have to go back to the drawing board, use a smaller battery pack, use less energy and so on. it's the driving force behind the design i'm working on - details here: http://lkcl.net/ev
you've misunderstood the point. i love KDE 3.5. i expected KDE 4 to be as good. i trusted the KDE team to do a good job, especially after receiving a $EUR 10m Grant and spending several years to develop a new UI paradigm.
i _expected_ that new UI paradigm to be self-evident and self-explanatory. i.e. intuitive.
if it fails that _basic_ test for someone with a well-above-average IQ.... you understand now?
so you're agreeing with me - that to trust the KDE team to develop a useful UI is a mistake, yes?
KDE 4 has made many mistakes. But setting the wallpaper?
Right-click desktop>Desktop Settings. "Wallpaper" is on the screen that immediately shows up.
yeah, you'd think so - it wasn't there. the option - i kid you not - wasn't there. that was the very first thing that i tried - right-click, desktop settings - because it's the most intuitively obvious thing, right?
yes, i oversimplified. they are a friend of my mum's, who is regularly called in to advise on computers because her friend keeps forgetting i set up remote access in order to be able to help them out. "all they wanted" was internet access, to check email.
So, if I understand your story well, you're trying to give your friend a computing solution that you have never even looked at before yourself? No wonder you're running into trouble.
yes, that's correct. i trusted the KDE team to provide a decent UI, after having all that money pumped into it, and they spectacularly failed both me, themselves and their users.
i do not expect a major EU-funded Free Software Desktop project to be user *hostile*.
when i install a UI i expect it to be a *user* interface, that's what it's called. an interface for *users*. have you read the book "beyond the desktop metaphor"?
i installed KDE 4 for a friend's friend. it took me 3 days to set up, because their ISP is very unreliable, at the extreme end of a broadband connection and they get 15k/sec (not kidding).
it all installed: i ran it, logged them in... and could i understand what the fuck was going on? not a chance. it was incredibly embarrassing. i spent 15 minutes _failing_ to do something as simple as set their background image. first we couldn't find it - i had to log in at the console and use "find . | xargs grep {filename}". then we couldn't find how to even _change_ the background image. on standard desktops, it's right-mouse, click "set background". done.
they now are so angry with me over how i told them that linux is great, and windows will result in their bank account details being stolen (a virus destroyed the bootloader, which is why i was called in), that they are no longer speaking to me.
now - you tell me that it's a great idea that KDE spent an entire multi-million Euros EU grant merely copying the UI of the most vilified and failed version of windows, ever, known as "Vista", and then make yourself known to me some day face-to-face i'll punch your fucking lights out.
gnome - i've never installed gnome, so i don't know about it. but, personally i'm sticking to fvwm, and i'm going to install LXDE for people, from now on. it's basic, it works, it's a known paradigm, and it's quick.
eventually i'll get round to finishing pyjdwm https://sourceforge.net/projects/pyjdwm/ though, and the first version _will_ copy the "standard" paradigm. window. bar. cross. menu at bottom. maybe:)
for mountain driving, fuel economy understandably critically depends on the weight. if you have a 550kg vehicle (including passengers) and a 25% gradient, then even at 50mph you still get almost 60mpg. if however on the other hand the weight is 1550kg, then that fuel economy drops staggeringly quick: expect to get best case 20mpg.
Chevvy volt: 80mpg in hybrid mode on long-range journeys. well under. the reported fuel economy figure is only if you've charged the batteries up overnight.
gasoline does *not* explode when put in contact with water and air. it doesn't even light if you put a flame to it. you have to vapourise gasoline with air (in the right mixture) and then apply a spark. sorry, h44h4r, you _know_ how the combustion engine works!:)
"Is the Lithium in LiIon batteries as explosive as other common fuels used in cars?"
YES! look it up: it spontaneously ignites and burns vigorously when given access to air and water. lithium has an electro-potential of 3.6 volts - it's highly reactive in other words, which is the whole reason why it works well as a battery.
other fuels at least if you expose them to air or water, they just sit there. even high-octane jet engine fuel isn't as damn dangerous as lithium. look it up: you really have to try hard to get petrol to ignite. you can put a flame to a pool of petrol: it *won't* burn. it's only when it's vapourised and mixed with air: _then_ it will ignite and explode... but so also does custard powder under the same circumstances!
"I wasn't aware that Nickel metal was considered highly toxic"
not highly toxic - just... toxic. google "nickel poisoning treatment". and it's absolute hell to get it out of a water source once contaminated.
"In the context of a car, how is a battery not a power source?"
it's not a fuel, is the point i'm making. you have to recharge it: you don't pour it in, or replace it (because replacements would be hell to transport). and, the energy storage density is much lower than gasoline or diesel.
"How would you design a car to accommodate a power source as opposed to a storage mechanism?"
the principle is well-understood - hybrids. the simplest way is "Series Hybrid" wikipedia page to the rescue...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_vehicle_drivetrain#Series_hybrid
however, this particular section is misleading in that it assumes that "direct drive" is efficient over the full torque and rpm range of an electric motor: i can tell you they're definitely not!
"How about giving us a hint about what your point is? The http://hybridcar.com/ [hybridcar.com] link is down"
ok, sorry about that. the point is that if you start from a position of a standard car, and make a single incremental change, you get nowhere, fast. in fact you get the _opposite_ of useful environmentally-friendly transport.
example: take a standard car 1.5 to 2.0 tonne vehicle and replace its engine with an electric motor. now you need 40% additional weight in batteries to make the car "socially acceptable" (i.e. long-range) you then need to beef up the suspension, chassis and so on - you've just massacred the entire point of converting to electric!
even if you take e.g. the chevy volt, or the nissan leaf, you still get fuel economy figures of only around 70 to 80 mpg. now that sounds great in U.S. fuel economy terms, but you have to appreciate that cars like the Geo Metro (Suzuki Swift to everyone else), and cars like the modern Nissan Micra and some of the VW Golfs have been getting over 70mpg for over a decade. the VW Golf can get 100mpg easily if you re-chip it so that it can't run on anything other than pure diesel (the standard factory calibration allows it to run on any kind of heavy oil or even ethanol).
but, unfortunately (as i point out in that article which is offline right now, apologies), the average mass-volume manufacturer can't cope with anything but incremental change, and even then it's touch-and-go as to whether they can cope with that.
the _real_ point is however that relying on "pure electric" is just.. madness, it really is. hybrids are the middle-ground compromise, but doing a really good job, by designing a decent aerodynamic shape, that's where i want to get to. so, i'm going ahead and designing exactly that: a decent aerodynamic bodyshell for use on an EV series-hybrid car.
yes, they are exclamation mark one exclamation mark:) but that really doesn't go down too well. hybrids on the other hand work very well: they're a compromise - a best-of-both-worlds compromise. which is why i'm designing an ultra-efficient one, having looked at the maths, done the simulations etc. http://lkcl.net/ev
it's so strange to have access to some basic maths, to have done vehicle simulations and also have an environmentally-friendly hat on, it catches me unawares when i see things like this. i have to double-take for a second, because it's so incredibly strange for EVs to have on-board either high-explosive materials (lithium) or highly toxic metals (nickel) in such huge quantities, i really can't understand why people don't understand that batteries are a storage mechanism not a power source, and don't design vehicles accordingly.
there's quite a lot involved, so please forgive me dear slashdot reader for not cut/pasting it all here - here's a link http://lkcl.net/ev to relevant articles and so on. some insights are also on http://hybridcar.com/
going with the majority teaches both the majority and the minority not to ever go with the majority, ever again. "the majority" is, by definition, "the median". i.e. *lower* than the "max". whoops.... john major's "classless society" and destroying the polytechnic system... he should have been strung up for that, but whoops, you can't do that either because he was... yep, voted in by a "majority"... *shakes head*...
this is precisely what the Natural Law Party proposed. they proposed not only local governance, but that specialists be invited to advise on specific subjects.
unfortunately, everybody thought that the Natural Law Party were coke-snorting left-wing loonies. actually, Mr Maharishi just thought that the trampoline guy was a hoot, so they didn't take him out of the Party Political Broadcasts ohh dearie me...:)
there's a risk that this subject line will automatically have people going "-1" automatically. this will demonstrate, graphically, how democracy is the weakest form of government.
if on the other hand, this message gets moderated up, then you know that slashdot's moderation system works as a "democracy".
i think it's worthwhile looking up the "Jefferson Mk 7" which you'll find in an arthur c clarke sci-fi novel. it's the one about remote interplanetary colonisation. it's called the "Mk 7" for obvious reasons, and its strongest point was cryptographically-secure random number generation to select the president... for an office duration of ONE (1) year. all persons ever expressing an interest in becoming president were automatically disqualified.
the point that the sci-fi writer was making, indirectly, is that modern democracy gets people the leaders that they DESERVE.
i much prefer the original greek system. you get everyone into an arena, and they ask each other questions about the population of the city (athens: 30,000). if they get the answer wrong, they're disqualified.
the last person left becomes the leader.
now that's democracy.
but best of all, i prefer the system where the leader has absolutely no power but to make "proclamations". very much like the debian so-called "leader", who is there merely to satisfy the "idiots" who go "what the fuck does this group of 1,000 developers think they're doing by _not_ having a leader??" so now they have one, all the remaining 999 developers can get some peace and get their heads down, get on with the job of packaging.
"democracy" - the means by which knee-jerk reactionary politics can result in decisions that are jolted back into complete reverse gear after 4 years. greaat.
so - if you define crowd-sourced direct democracy as being the "voice of the people", then yeah, it works. it tells you quite how scarey crowds can be. the "collective consciousness" of crowds shines through, loud and clear. maybe that's a good thing, when the mob shows itself to be an ass instead of being sensible.
me, i live in a remote area of scotland, away from crowds. maybe that tells you something, maybe it doesn't...
how many of those 47,826 vendors ships source code? have you any fucking idea how hard it is to get these companies to fucking well understand the GPL, dickhead? i've been dealing with these companies for eighteen fucking months, and they just don't give a flying fuck. not to mention the simple fact that they themselves are supplied with GPL-violating binary-only distributions, they have absolutely no software expertise whatsoever; their ODM software suppliers can't keep hold of their own developers because the supply of software engineers in China is so in demand.
it takes about three to four months of careful negotiation, with about a 1% hit rate (i.e. 99% of them don't understand english except phrases like "the money has been transferred" and "we want to order XX,XXX units", and those that do understand don't give a shit) we've found THREE suppliers who comprehend the GPL, and that was only after explaining it to them. of those two suppliers, one STILL doesn't give a shit, one of them was so terrified of the consequences that they terminated sales of the product, and the other one is, thank god, still in the running, is willing to work with us and we will supply their next software *for* them.... but that was after 18 months to 2 years of searching. now, are you _seriously_ suggesting to these guys that they spend allll their time and money doing exactly the same thing? i think you'll find that they're better off actually designing their own hardware and writing their own software.
anyway, to answer the actual question: use openembedded to custom-build an angstrom linux distro. it's been around for over 10 years, now, so is a pretty mature development platform, and has some superb recipes. ask on the openembedded lists or irc, be patient and you'll get the advice you seek.
Slashdot Mirror
Right, so when a company end of lines a product they're criticised for not open sourcing it.
Now when a company open sources an end of lined product, they're "offloading another failing technology".
This is why companies don't give a fuck what the FOSS community thinks, because with the FOSS community you can never do anything right. See all the whinging about Android's open source initiatives for another fine example.
right. what, the ones where, just like trolltech and oracle doing qt4 and mysql doing a one-way push where you cannot truly contribute except as a paid-up slave^H^H^H^H^Hemployee, the product cannot truly be considered to be either "Open" or "Free"? have you actually looked at the number of lines of code involved? do you even understand that "Libre" is not just about the "Releasing Of Some Code" it is about developing and fostering an open, exciting and above-all *inclusive* community attitude?
do you understand that without a group of actual independent contributors or a means and a clear path by which random contributors can actually like... y'know... contribute - do you actually understand that without this absolutely critical critical means for people to actually contribute there *is* no "Software Libre", and no amount of renaming exercises as "Open" will ever change a proprietary product into a "Software Libre" one without also having a vibrant community around it.
i don't understand why people don't understand this. look at FreeDCE for example, or ISODE. have you even heard of ISODE 8.0? it's a full-on X500 Directory Services server, released _decades_ ago under a BSD-compatible license. it was free software way before anyone understood free software. but everyone rejected X500 in favour of "LDAP". then, of course, they went "shit - this LDAP stuff is shit! i know, let's extend it, that'll make it better, won't it?" and they've spent a good decade+ reimplementing X500 _back_ into LDAP, thus no longer making it "light"!
the point of mentioning FreeDCE and ISODE is that even releasing technically superior code as Free Software *doesn't* mean it's going to magically end up with a vibrant community based around it - hence the reason why adobe's hunting for victims to take FLEX off their hands. the problem is that they should have done this over 10 years ago, when FLEX was actually relevant.
now, if they released the source code of flash player as Free Software (so that gnash and swfdec could incorporate some missing features) now *that* would be interesting, and worthwhile: they still have a limited window of opportunity in which to do that. but, i believe it's far more likely that they'll just fail to take advantage of the opportunity until it's too late, there, too.
overall i'm looking at a company that's on its way out. by embracing HTML5 they have entered - late - a market they really don't understand, and do not have a big differentiator from absolutely anyone else in the HTML5 market. nobody buys PDF readers. nobody buys Flash Servers because you can get red5, rtmpy and others. time to die, Adobe. cut the losses, and shut up shop.
You realize that you're talking about lithium-metal right? All mainstream electric vehicles are using lithium-ion which is a different technology. A lithium-ion battery _will_not_ catch fire when exposed to air and water. Lithium-ion batteries will catch fire when heated to above around 120C which can happen by an internal short circuit, or if punctured by a piece of metal.
Stop spreading FUD. Lithium-ion batteries are much safer than lithium-metal batteries, which is why lithium-ion batteries are being used despite their lower energy density.
listen to yourself. stop spreading FUD... but you're ok with lithium-ion batteries exploding if short-circuited or heated to above 120C, mm?
at least with lead-acid cells you _only_ get warm acid thrown on your face if you short-circuit and boil them, which if you're desperate can be washed off with lots of water. you can't wash burning lithium off your face, can you.
so, thank you for the corrections - it allows me to more accurately state that, thanks to the use of lithium (in any form), death can be caused only by short-circuit or heating the cells above 120C rather than that the death can be caused by exposure to air and water.
honestly :)
hey really really appreciated the comments.
i could go over everything but it's yes on all accounts to everything you've said :) so that's really appreciated. btw do you notice how there is a corresponding "suction" bit at the back of the lancia? airflow goes up over the spoiler, but that results in suction of the airflow (bernouilli effect) from underneath.
yes absolutely on the sportsbike engine and gearbox: i'm actually really looking forward to doing that version :)
yes on the FWD - we've picked the Suzuki Swift (aka Geo Metro) gearbox precisely for this reason: it's 21kg, it's 17in long, 13in high but only because of the clutch-plate - and in combination with an 8in x 8in BLDC motor you get something that's *only* 2ft wide but includes the differential built-in! amazing - and it came out of suzuki adapting a motorbike gearbox for the job.
gbrmh, thank you for these really valuable comments and links.
regarding the aerodynamics: it's because i had to place absolutely every single point and triangle using mm3d by hand! crazed as that sounds, it means i had to pay attention to every single aspect and detail, but yet it is still slowly morphing into something that resembles, at the base, a 2-seater canoe, and on the top a classic delta-wing.
also bear in mind that it came out of point-matching around photographs (front, side, top, back) where the original cardboard model had literally been sliced and hacked with an ultra-sharp serrated-edge tomato kitchen knife, and bits of replacement cardboard stuck on with tape! it's surprisingly effective.
regarding the cars, i think it's essential that i review those separately: i'll add them to http://lkcl.net/ev/comparison.html shortly.
thank you!
after 150 years, the design of the lead-acid cell has not really been improved on. rainer partenan's nanotech aluminium-based battery which has (had) a 5x storage capacity improvement for its weight over NiMh was thoroughly discredited. research grants 15 years ago by the U.S. Govt were *only* given for batteries with a voltage over 2.0 volts, in order, one can only assume, to prevent and prohibit the funding and discovery of aluminium-based battery technology.
we therefore have to work with what we've got: it's no good saying "oh we have to wait yet _another_ decade or two until someone comes up with the goods" FUCK that, there are more ways than one to skin a cat, ok?
so the alternatives are to skin the vehicle down to an absolute minimum required, then make it *look* from the outside (for social acceptance as well as driving safety reasons) like it's a "full-on square back-sided car" jobbie. in other words, you stuff a massively-streamlined body inside an empty outer shell. this is the principle behind what i'm working on - http://lkcl.net/ev
it's _not_ all about the batteries. we _have_ all the pieces of the puzzle already - have done for over 5 years now. it's just that nobody's put them all together... yet.
the RAV4-EV was the same, except there, a public campaign persuaded Toyota to stop, good for them!
read "the other side of innovation" also see article here http://www.hybridcar.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=822&Itemid=122 you may need to get the text version here - http://lkcl.net/ev/curious_state_of_hybrids.txt
innovation is virtually impossible for mass-production companies to "slot in" to the "efficiency engine". they literally can't do it. there are also legal issues that need to be taken into account, such as a guaranteed 7-year-supply of parts *after* the vehicle's *last* mass-production run is finished.
the article above goes into detail.
http://lkcl.net/ev
why am i not surprised! it's funny (not really) but this accident vindicates what i've been talking about. you _can't_ put a material that spontaneously catches fire when exposed to air and water (lithium) into a car! so you have to use "safe" non-explosive materials such as gasoline or diesel (no, you cannot set light to gasoline even with a naked flame, you have to vapourise it, mix it with air and hit it with a spark), and lead-acid for the batteries. that means that you have to go back to the drawing board, use a smaller battery pack, use less energy and so on. it's the driving force behind the design i'm working on - details here: http://lkcl.net/ev
you've misunderstood the point. i love KDE 3.5. i expected KDE 4 to be as good. i trusted the KDE team to do a good job, especially after receiving a $EUR 10m Grant and spending several years to develop a new UI paradigm.
i _expected_ that new UI paradigm to be self-evident and self-explanatory. i.e. intuitive.
if it fails that _basic_ test for someone with a well-above-average IQ.... you understand now?
so you're agreeing with me - that to trust the KDE team to develop a useful UI is a mistake, yes?
KDE 4 has made many mistakes. But setting the wallpaper?
Right-click desktop>Desktop Settings. "Wallpaper" is on the screen that immediately shows up.
yeah, you'd think so - it wasn't there. the option - i kid you not - wasn't there. that was the very first thing that i tried - right-click, desktop settings - because it's the most intuitively obvious thing, right?
yes, i oversimplified. they are a friend of my mum's, who is regularly called in to advise on computers because her friend keeps forgetting i set up remote access in order to be able to help them out. "all they wanted" was internet access, to check email.
So, if I understand your story well, you're trying to give your friend a computing solution that you have never even looked at before yourself? No wonder you're running into trouble.
yes, that's correct. i trusted the KDE team to provide a decent UI, after having all that money pumped into it, and they spectacularly failed both me, themselves and their users.
i do not expect a major EU-funded Free Software Desktop project to be user *hostile*.
when i install a UI i expect it to be a *user* interface, that's what it's called. an interface for *users*. have you read the book "beyond the desktop metaphor"?
yeah, it's the penguins and the polar bears, they've been lighting fires.
Although I realize this is a joke, I feel obliged to mention, there are no polar bears in Antarctica.
ah ha! .. you see? :)
i installed KDE 4 for a friend's friend. it took me 3 days to set up, because their ISP is very unreliable, at the extreme end of a broadband connection and they get 15k/sec (not kidding).
it all installed: i ran it, logged them in... and could i understand what the fuck was going on? not a chance. it was incredibly embarrassing. i spent 15 minutes _failing_ to do something as simple as set their background image. first we couldn't find it - i had to log in at the console and use "find . | xargs grep {filename}". then we couldn't find how to even _change_ the background image. on standard desktops, it's right-mouse, click "set background". done.
they now are so angry with me over how i told them that linux is great, and windows will result in their bank account details being stolen (a virus destroyed the bootloader, which is why i was called in), that they are no longer speaking to me.
now - you tell me that it's a great idea that KDE spent an entire multi-million Euros EU grant merely copying the UI of the most vilified and failed version of windows, ever, known as "Vista", and then make yourself known to me some day face-to-face i'll punch your fucking lights out.
gnome - i've never installed gnome, so i don't know about it. but, personally i'm sticking to fvwm, and i'm going to install LXDE for people, from now on. it's basic, it works, it's a known paradigm, and it's quick.
eventually i'll get round to finishing pyjdwm https://sourceforge.net/projects/pyjdwm/ though, and the first version _will_ copy the "standard" paradigm. window. bar. cross. menu at bottom. maybe :)
for mountain driving, fuel economy understandably critically depends on the weight. if you have a 550kg vehicle (including passengers) and a 25% gradient, then even at 50mph you still get almost 60mpg. if however on the other hand the weight is 1550kg, then that fuel economy drops staggeringly quick: expect to get best case 20mpg.
i'll add "gradient" in a moment to the simulator i'm writing, so you can try it out here: http://lkcl.net/ev/vehicle_simulator/output/Simulator.html
Chevvy volt: 80mpg in hybrid mode on long-range journeys. well under. the reported fuel economy figure is only if you've charged the batteries up overnight.
gasoline does *not* explode when put in contact with water and air. it doesn't even light if you put a flame to it. you have to vapourise gasoline with air (in the right mixture) and then apply a spark. sorry, h44h4r, you _know_ how the combustion engine works! :)
"Is the Lithium in LiIon batteries as explosive as other common fuels used in cars?"
YES! look it up: it spontaneously ignites and burns vigorously when given access to air and water. lithium has an electro-potential of 3.6 volts - it's highly reactive in other words, which is the whole reason why it works well as a battery.
other fuels at least if you expose them to air or water, they just sit there. even high-octane jet engine fuel isn't as damn dangerous as lithium. look it up: you really have to try hard to get petrol to ignite. you can put a flame to a pool of petrol: it *won't* burn. it's only when it's vapourised and mixed with air: _then_ it will ignite and explode... but so also does custard powder under the same circumstances!
"I wasn't aware that Nickel metal was considered highly toxic"
not highly toxic - just... toxic. google "nickel poisoning treatment". and it's absolute hell to get it out of a water source once contaminated.
"In the context of a car, how is a battery not a power source?"
it's not a fuel, is the point i'm making. you have to recharge it: you don't pour it in, or replace it (because replacements would be hell to transport). and, the energy storage density is much lower than gasoline or diesel.
"How would you design a car to accommodate a power source as opposed to a storage mechanism?"
the principle is well-understood - hybrids. the simplest way is "Series Hybrid" wikipedia page to the rescue...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_vehicle_drivetrain#Series_hybrid
however, this particular section is misleading in that it assumes that "direct drive" is efficient over the full torque and rpm range of an electric motor: i can tell you they're definitely not!
"How about giving us a hint about what your point is? The http://hybridcar.com/ [hybridcar.com] link is down"
bugger! http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=site%3Ahybridcar.com+curious+lack
ok, sorry about that. the point is that if you start from a position of a standard car, and make a single incremental change, you get nowhere, fast. in fact you get the _opposite_ of useful environmentally-friendly transport.
example: take a standard car 1.5 to 2.0 tonne vehicle and replace its engine with an electric motor. now you need 40% additional weight in batteries to make the car "socially acceptable" (i.e. long-range) you then need to beef up the suspension, chassis and so on - you've just massacred the entire point of converting to electric!
even if you take e.g. the chevy volt, or the nissan leaf, you still get fuel economy figures of only around 70 to 80 mpg. now that sounds great in U.S. fuel economy terms, but you have to appreciate that cars like the Geo Metro (Suzuki Swift to everyone else), and cars like the modern Nissan Micra and some of the VW Golfs have been getting over 70mpg for over a decade. the VW Golf can get 100mpg easily if you re-chip it so that it can't run on anything other than pure diesel (the standard factory calibration allows it to run on any kind of heavy oil or even ethanol).
but, unfortunately (as i point out in that article which is offline right now, apologies), the average mass-volume manufacturer can't cope with anything but incremental change, and even then it's touch-and-go as to whether they can cope with that.
the _real_ point is however that relying on "pure electric" is just.. madness, it really is. hybrids are the middle-ground compromise, but doing a really good job, by designing a decent aerodynamic shape, that's where i want to get to. so, i'm going ahead and designing exactly that: a decent aerodynamic bodyshell for use on an EV series-hybrid car.
yes, they are exclamation mark one exclamation mark :) but that really doesn't go down too well. hybrids on the other hand work very well: they're a compromise - a best-of-both-worlds compromise. which is why i'm designing an ultra-efficient one, having looked at the maths, done the simulations etc. http://lkcl.net/ev
it's so strange to have access to some basic maths, to have done vehicle simulations and also have an environmentally-friendly hat on, it catches me unawares when i see things like this. i have to double-take for a second, because it's so incredibly strange for EVs to have on-board either high-explosive materials (lithium) or highly toxic metals (nickel) in such huge quantities, i really can't understand why people don't understand that batteries are a storage mechanism not a power source, and don't design vehicles accordingly.
there's quite a lot involved, so please forgive me dear slashdot reader for not cut/pasting it all here - here's a link http://lkcl.net/ev to relevant articles and so on. some insights are also on http://hybridcar.com/
going with the majority teaches both the majority and the minority not to ever go with the majority, ever again. "the majority" is, by definition, "the median". i.e. *lower* than the "max". whoops.... john major's "classless society" and destroying the polytechnic system... he should have been strung up for that, but whoops, you can't do that either because he was... yep, voted in by a "majority"... *shakes head*...
this is precisely what the Natural Law Party proposed. they proposed not only local governance, but that specialists be invited to advise on specific subjects.
unfortunately, everybody thought that the Natural Law Party were coke-snorting left-wing loonies. actually, Mr Maharishi just thought that the trampoline guy was a hoot, so they didn't take him out of the Party Political Broadcasts ohh dearie me... :)
there's a risk that this subject line will automatically have people going "-1" automatically. this will demonstrate, graphically, how democracy is the weakest form of government.
if on the other hand, this message gets moderated up, then you know that slashdot's moderation system works as a "democracy".
i think it's worthwhile looking up the "Jefferson Mk 7" which you'll find in an arthur c clarke sci-fi novel. it's the one about remote interplanetary colonisation. it's called the "Mk 7" for obvious reasons, and its strongest point was cryptographically-secure random number generation to select the president... for an office duration of ONE (1) year. all persons ever expressing an interest in becoming president were automatically disqualified.
the point that the sci-fi writer was making, indirectly, is that modern democracy gets people the leaders that they DESERVE.
i much prefer the original greek system. you get everyone into an arena, and they ask each other questions about the population of the city (athens: 30,000). if they get the answer wrong, they're disqualified.
the last person left becomes the leader.
now that's democracy.
but best of all, i prefer the system where the leader has absolutely no power but to make "proclamations". very much like the debian so-called "leader", who is there merely to satisfy the "idiots" who go "what the fuck does this group of 1,000 developers think they're doing by _not_ having a leader??" so now they have one, all the remaining 999 developers can get some peace and get their heads down, get on with the job of packaging.
"democracy" - the means by which knee-jerk reactionary politics can result in decisions that are jolted back into complete reverse gear after 4 years. greaat.
so - if you define crowd-sourced direct democracy as being the "voice of the people", then yeah, it works. it tells you quite how scarey crowds can be. the "collective consciousness" of crowds shines through, loud and clear. maybe that's a good thing, when the mob shows itself to be an ass instead of being sensible.
me, i live in a remote area of scotland, away from crowds. maybe that tells you something, maybe it doesn't...
yeah, it's the penguins and the polar bears, they've been lighting fires.
how many of those 47,826 vendors ships source code? have you any fucking idea how hard it is to get these companies to fucking well understand the GPL, dickhead? i've been dealing with these companies for eighteen fucking months, and they just don't give a flying fuck. not to mention the simple fact that they themselves are supplied with GPL-violating binary-only distributions, they have absolutely no software expertise whatsoever; their ODM software suppliers can't keep hold of their own developers because the supply of software engineers in China is so in demand.
it takes about three to four months of careful negotiation, with about a 1% hit rate (i.e. 99% of them don't understand english except phrases like "the money has been transferred" and "we want to order XX,XXX units", and those that do understand don't give a shit) we've found THREE suppliers who comprehend the GPL, and that was only after explaining it to them. of those two suppliers, one STILL doesn't give a shit, one of them was so terrified of the consequences that they terminated sales of the product, and the other one is, thank god, still in the running, is willing to work with us and we will supply their next software *for* them. ... but that was after 18 months to 2 years of searching. now, are you _seriously_ suggesting to these guys that they spend allll their time and money doing exactly the same thing? i think you'll find that they're better off actually designing their own hardware and writing their own software.
anyway, to answer the actual question: use openembedded to custom-build an angstrom linux distro. it's been around for over 10 years, now, so is a pretty mature development platform, and has some superb recipes. ask on the openembedded lists or irc, be patient and you'll get the advice you seek.
i love the summary. the technology will help reduce congestion, will help fuel waste, and will help accidents. whoops :)