When that happens, auto insurance rates will be adjusted accordingly for autonomous vehicles, and soon you'll find that manual driving is not only expensive, but even illegal in many areas.
This is absurd. Do you realize how many people drive for recreation/sport? Most residential areas are not conveniently located near a closed race circuit, and where such facilities do exist, it's typically quite expensive to use them. The point of the sports car is to add enjoyment to an otherwise mundane driving experience, and to do so by using the car on public roads. This will not change. People will continue to drive human-controlled cars through 2020 and beyond.
Sure, I wouldn't do without the ABS either but if it stops working, I can still bring the car safely to a halt.
Except for the failure mode where bad data from the wheel sensors (or a software/firmware problem) causes the system to think that the wheels are locked, and thus opens a valve in the valve block, removing your braking ability. This happened to a guy I know, and he drove off an embankment because he was dumb enough to have trusted a vehicle with ABS.
Mm... no. OBD stands for "On-Board Diagnostics", i.e. a standard by which diagnostic information can be read. It is not and should not be used as a mechanism by which the functioning of systems within the car can be changed.
Absolutely one of the finest engines ever designed. There are quite a few flat-crank V8s in racing, as the NVH issues become unimportant if you're not talking about a road car.
Whoa there. Parent post is loaded with incorrect information:
I have never heard of a 90-degree V12. Most are at 60 degrees, with the notable exception of Ferrari's V12s (which have historically been at 65, or 180 in the case of the 365/512 engine series.)
A flat-plane crank V8 is essentially two inline-four engines. A cross-plane crank V8 uses an uneven firing order and is not the same.
With their crankshaft counterweights, cross-plane V8s have better dynamic balance than flat-crank V8s. There's a very good reason why flat-crank V8s aren't commonly used in road cars: unless you're able to make the engine internals very light, the noise/vibration/harshness (NVH) will be awful, and most consumers won't be interested in buying your car. The cross-crank V8 is not a "dirty kludge", and most people prefer the exhaust burble to the sharp bark of the flat-crank design.
Almost every major V8-making manufacturer produces exclusively cross-plane crank V8s. Ferrari, Lotus, and TVR are the only major exceptions. Saying that the only "real" V8 is a flat-crank is silly.
Do you understand that the Hotchkiss rear suspension (which is what you're thinking of) involves a solid rear axle and is completely different from the transverse single composite monospring used by the Corvette (which uses IRS)? The Corvette has had fully independent suspension since 1963.
I'm a fan of Jeremy Clarkson and his wacky antics too, but when he talks about American cars he's often quite wrong.
Yeah, this story is about copyright and the Internet. Don't turn it into an argument about how people have proven themselves so responsible that they should be free to use drugs.
Additionally, copyright needs reform, not abolition. I think that's pretty obvious.
They're called "dampers" or "shock dampers", not "shock absorbers". The springs on a vehicle are absorbing the shock, and the dampers have the job of damping the resulting oscillation of the sprung mass.
In a way, the job the dampers do is almost opposite that of shock absorption.
I can't be the first one to think: how do they plan to ever sell electric cars as daily drivers in regions of the country where it gets cold?
I don't think lithium-ion battery technology works very well in freezing temperatures. Also, there's no good way to get heat from electricity. You could just dump current through an element and blow air across it, but that would probably cut your driving range by 90% -- a driving range that has already been significantly reduced because the batteries are too cold.
People always criticize the internal combustion engine for being inefficient, but the fact is that all that "waste heat" isn't wasted at all. You need it to keep the passengers warm. I live in New England, and I'd like to not freeze on my way to work.
It'll be pretty hard to sell people around here on a "family car" that you can't use between October and May.
Actually, I would disagree. It should be perfectly legal to shout FIRE in a theater. If people get trampled, whose fault is it? Not the guy who yelled -- he hasn't hurt anyone. It's the ones doing the trampling that are in the wrong.
You clearly haven't thought this through at all. What's to prevent malicious or mischievous people from going around to every crowded public venue in a city and inciting panic? The law is well aware that humans, being human, will usually react instinctively before they've had time to calmly assess a situation.
And where would it end? If it were legal to falsely claim there's a fire in a crowded building, why couldn't you also falsely report a kidnapping? Filing false police reports is not protected speech either.
So what? Free speech has nothing to do with what's "fair".
Um... that's not correct at all. It's not fair to people in a movie theater to yell 'fire!' and create a panic, and that's why such speech is not constitutionally protected.
It can also be illegal to defame an individual with slanderous speech, especially where such slander is injurious to their business/profession. That isn't constitutionally protected either. There's two examples off the top of my head where fairness is at odds with free speech, and fairness wins.
That's a different issue. Federal cars are required by law to have emissions control, airbags (driver and passenger), DOT-approved glass, side-impact beams, OBD-II, etc. Developing and integrating all that shit is expensive. Pretty soon, it looks like they'll also require some more "features" like traction control and automatic stability control.
There are lots of people who aren't willing to pay for any of this nonsense, but that doesn't change the fact that all new cars are required to have it, and the prices reflect this.
That's irrelevant, since you don't need the source code to find buffer overflows. It just reduces the time needed to find them.
A reduction in the time needed to find such a bug is the best thing you could hope for. And, oh, gee - that's exactly what access to the source code gives us.
No, you seem to have a problem with communication. You made the absurd claim that there is no such thing as instantaneous velocity. You then attempted to back it up by arguing that instantaneous velocity cannot be directly measured, which is obvious.
He's right; in reality, there is no such thing as instantaneous velocity. Such a concept implies that, associated with a moment a time and with no information about the position of a body immediately prior to or following that moment, there is a particular velocity of said body.
Remember that v = displacement/delta-t. Of course, delta-t is exactly zero in the 'instantaneous' case, which incurs a divide-by-zero error. This happens because velocity does not exist if time has not elapsed.
Calculus only tells us what velocity would be, which, it turns out, is perfectly acceptable for all human applications thus far.
because in california, pollution is a function of TIME, not MILES like most other places.
Somewhat off-topic, but it sounds to me like California ought to spend a little time dealing with this problem themselves before it starts using its economic might to force the auto industry to develop cars with expensive emissions subsystems to specifically address the situation in their state.
Slashdot Mirror
This is absurd. Do you realize how many people drive for recreation/sport? Most residential areas are not conveniently located near a closed race circuit, and where such facilities do exist, it's typically quite expensive to use them. The point of the sports car is to add enjoyment to an otherwise mundane driving experience, and to do so by using the car on public roads. This will not change. People will continue to drive human-controlled cars through 2020 and beyond.
Except for the failure mode where bad data from the wheel sensors (or a software/firmware problem) causes the system to think that the wheels are locked, and thus opens a valve in the valve block, removing your braking ability. This happened to a guy I know, and he drove off an embankment because he was dumb enough to have trusted a vehicle with ABS.
ABS is a terrible, terrible idea.
Mm... no. OBD stands for "On-Board Diagnostics", i.e. a standard by which diagnostic information can be read. It is not and should not be used as a mechanism by which the functioning of systems within the car can be changed.
Yeah, unicode will definitely save us all.
Have you ever heard of the Cosworth DFV?
Absolutely one of the finest engines ever designed. There are quite a few flat-crank V8s in racing, as the NVH issues become unimportant if you're not talking about a road car.
Whoa there. Parent post is loaded with incorrect information:
I have never heard of a 90-degree V12. Most are at 60 degrees, with the notable exception of Ferrari's V12s (which have historically been at 65, or 180 in the case of the 365/512 engine series.)
A flat-plane crank V8 is essentially two inline-four engines. A cross-plane crank V8 uses an uneven firing order and is not the same.
With their crankshaft counterweights, cross-plane V8s have better dynamic balance than flat-crank V8s. There's a very good reason why flat-crank V8s aren't commonly used in road cars: unless you're able to make the engine internals very light, the noise/vibration/harshness (NVH) will be awful, and most consumers won't be interested in buying your car. The cross-crank V8 is not a "dirty kludge", and most people prefer the exhaust burble to the sharp bark of the flat-crank design.
Almost every major V8-making manufacturer produces exclusively cross-plane crank V8s. Ferrari, Lotus, and TVR are the only major exceptions. Saying that the only "real" V8 is a flat-crank is silly.
Yes they sound interesting but the only flat plane crank V8 I ever heard of is the old Nova made from two Offy's.
You've never heard of the Ferrari 308? (or 328, 348, 355, 360, or 430?) Or the Lotus Esprit V8? Or the TVR Cerbera?
Ok, I wouldn't be too surprised if you'd never heard of the Cerbera, but Ferrari has been using flat-crank V8s for a long time.
But GM couldn't change its mindset, and instead sat and twiddled their thumbs while the Japanese took away their business.
I'm pretty sure there aren't any Japanese 3/4 heavy trucks.
leaf springs work very well on trucks
like Corvette
Do you understand that the Hotchkiss rear suspension (which is what you're thinking of) involves a solid rear axle and is completely different from the transverse single composite monospring used by the Corvette (which uses IRS)? The Corvette has had fully independent suspension since 1963.
I'm a fan of Jeremy Clarkson and his wacky antics too, but when he talks about American cars he's often quite wrong.
Inline V-8
I am confuse.
60% of the population of the Netherlands live below sea level. Are they all stupid too?
And how often do major hurricanes tear through that area?
Nobody. It's just idiots and hippies. A lot of them are posting comments right here, in fact.
That sounds like a Red Meat slug line.
Yeah, this story is about copyright and the Internet. Don't turn it into an argument about how people have proven themselves so responsible that they should be free to use drugs.
Additionally, copyright needs reform, not abolition. I think that's pretty obvious.
They're called "dampers" or "shock dampers", not "shock absorbers". The springs on a vehicle are absorbing the shock, and the dampers have the job of damping the resulting oscillation of the sprung mass. In a way, the job the dampers do is almost opposite that of shock absorption.
I can't be the first one to think: how do they plan to ever sell electric cars as daily drivers in regions of the country where it gets cold?
I don't think lithium-ion battery technology works very well in freezing temperatures. Also, there's no good way to get heat from electricity. You could just dump current through an element and blow air across it, but that would probably cut your driving range by 90% -- a driving range that has already been significantly reduced because the batteries are too cold.
People always criticize the internal combustion engine for being inefficient, but the fact is that all that "waste heat" isn't wasted at all. You need it to keep the passengers warm. I live in New England, and I'd like to not freeze on my way to work.
It'll be pretty hard to sell people around here on a "family car" that you can't use between October and May.
You clearly haven't thought this through at all. What's to prevent malicious or mischievous people from going around to every crowded public venue in a city and inciting panic? The law is well aware that humans, being human, will usually react instinctively before they've had time to calmly assess a situation.
And where would it end? If it were legal to falsely claim there's a fire in a crowded building, why couldn't you also falsely report a kidnapping? Filing false police reports is not protected speech either.
Um... that's not correct at all. It's not fair to people in a movie theater to yell 'fire!' and create a panic, and that's why such speech is not constitutionally protected.
It can also be illegal to defame an individual with slanderous speech, especially where such slander is injurious to their business/profession. That isn't constitutionally protected either. There's two examples off the top of my head where fairness is at odds with free speech, and fairness wins.
There are lots of people who aren't willing to pay for any of this nonsense, but that doesn't change the fact that all new cars are required to have it, and the prices reflect this.
He's right; in reality, there is no such thing as instantaneous velocity. Such a concept implies that, associated with a moment a time and with no information about the position of a body immediately prior to or following that moment, there is a particular velocity of said body.
Remember that v = displacement/delta-t. Of course, delta-t is exactly zero in the 'instantaneous' case, which incurs a divide-by-zero error. This happens because velocity does not exist if time has not elapsed.
Calculus only tells us what velocity would be, which, it turns out, is perfectly acceptable for all human applications thus far.Somewhat off-topic, but it sounds to me like California ought to spend a little time dealing with this problem themselves before it starts using its economic might to force the auto industry to develop cars with expensive emissions subsystems to specifically address the situation in their state.