If I was driving a high performance car, 75% throttle is burning tires.
You need better tires:)
But you're right. I got into a retarded discussion on/. not long ago with someone who was convinced that full acceleration was the most fuel efficient way to accelerate, basically because the throttle body is all the way open, and anything less than that causes drag through the intake. My head assplode at the number of basic things that would need to be taught to this person to grasp how they are wrong. I wish I had though of the vacuum gauge, or, even better a wide band A/F meter. Not that it would have gotten me anywhere with that guy.
I've got an old (late 85) Porsche 944 project car. It has a fuel economy gauge below the speedo. I had no idea that this would happen, but it actually makes me drive differently. I suspect that it would do that same for many others as well. I find myself easing off when driving to try to keep it over 30 MPG.
Most BMWs since the late 80s or so have had these as well (likely because they were using a similar Bosch engine management system). This stuff isn't hard - you're absolutely correct. I suspect that most american cars don't have them because it would just be depressing. I know I don't want to see a needle on 10MPG all day long when I'm driving my pickup.
Montana doesn't have a daytime speed limit. It is "safe and proper".....meaning don't drive dangerously. 100 on a straight stretch of deserted road is just fine. 80 through a highway full oc other cars doing 55 gets you a ticket.
Texas also has rural areas with an 80MH speed limit, and I believe Utah is/was considering the same.
Now, check out the $150 Billion in pork-barrel projects that were added by the Senate to the original 100-page bailout that failed in the House, turning it into a 450-page bailout:
There are two thing that really bother me about these types of things in general. First of all, why are provisions having NOTHING AT ALL to do with the resolution being passed on that resolution. Well, I know why, but why is it allowed. It's slimy.
Secondly, when you go to this bill to get details about these pork sections, they are worded in such a way to make them terribly opaque. One would have to spend over 30 minutes a piece cross referencing other bills, substituting text, striking text, etc. in order to get a real read on what the provision actually MEANS. I have no doubt this is one on purpose.
You also have to look at MPG/P (yeah...miles per gallon per person). A 12-passenger van that gets 14 MPG full of people will smoke a Prius full of people any day.
It's all about how you drive it and with what. Imagine that - choosing the right vehicle for the job you need to do makes a difference.
I daresay a new full sized Ford pickup truck gets better mileage than a 1975 full sized Ford of the same model.
I used to have a 1974 F-250. It weighed a ton, could pull down a house (.511 rears and a granny gear 4-speed), and had a 390 with a 4-barrel carb on it. It got between 6 and 8 MPG. I remember thinking how funny it was when I got 2 MPG the one day when I was driving around with the plow on. Yeah...that shot was pretty funny when gas was $1.20.
I now have a 97 F250 that I bought new years ago. It produces more power with slightly less torque, but it's no big deal - it still does the same towing jobs just fine. It comfortable, quiet inside (for a truck), has powere everything, air conditioning, etc. It gets 16 MPG. The only time it gets 8 is when I'm pulling a 24' RV trailer through hilly areas.
Yeah...I'd say the auto manufacturers are getting better at this.
Oh yeah....the '74 needed a new motor at 80,000 miles. The '97 has over 200k on it and it's reasonably fine still.
My point wasn't entirely clear: I'm not saying they don't exist. But the vast majority of routers out there that are passing packets right now that COULD pass IPv6 can only do it in software. Mine definitely included. This is yet another barrier where you'll have to show me the money before I'll consider upgrading (I'm a wholesale VoIP provider that passes about 200 MBit 95th percentile - with redundancy and the ability to pass the insane packet count that VoIP creates puts me in the $40k range for new routers).
What's going to be more expensive: A massive NAT box or an IPv6-enabled router (as many already are)?
The IPv6 router.
Take a router that will pass GigE with IPv4 and put IPv6 on it with any sore to sane, normal policies. It will fall on its face at 100 MBit, if even that much.
Why? While many routers "support" IPv6, it is software support only, and does not tak advantage of ASICs. etc that we've come to rely on for high bandwidth packet mangling.
Click on "Configure and Buy" from that page and you get:
This section of the Website is compatible with only Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.x and higher. We are presently working on supporting other browsers. Sorry for this inconvenience.
Re:I don't know if I fully agree with that
on
Fire Your IT Boss
·
· Score: 1
The problem is not that he's a technical manager. It's that he's a bad one.
Re:I don't know if I fully agree with that
on
Fire Your IT Boss
·
· Score: 1
Bad (incomplete) summary. You should have read the FA.
I should point out that these latter tasks can be copied and pasted straight from properly composed Google queries. They aren't a test of programming knowledge at all, just of the ability to use the Internet. Yet many technical managers will fail and should get the boot as a result. You can't manage what you can't understand.
No doubt. And the fact that using the only RPM package manager I have any interest in using (yum) ends up with them having an out on the support contract.
We're a 30 server CentOS shop now. Mostly 5, but some 4 in there still. It works just fine, and, being a tech company, I just don't see the need for a support contract. And because its RHEL, all the stupid Dell DMI/Openmanage/firmware updates work just fine.
And then there's that whole pesky static pressure issue. Like if the building isn't sealed up much, you're creating a seriously negative pressure in the server room and dragging all the a/c in. Or if it's well sealed, you won't move much air out of the racks at all.
iShitting will allow serious shitters to compete in such areas as Stench, Log Size, Color, and Composition (with bonus points awarded for visible undigested food, gum, etc).
You're the one writing that? I'm the guy in the dev forums making the "gum 'n pennies" and the "Corn! When did you have corn?" plug ins.
The NSA doesn't need stupid BGP tricks to eavesdrop on Internet traffic. They can take over rooms at peering point and put in optical splitters to their heart's content.
Anyone who knows anything about basic Internet protocols should be shitting themselves right about now.
And those of us who actually do this stuff for a living (who already knew at least most of this) are neither surprised, nor any more paranoid about it. As a matter of fact, this might be the sauce needed to get more providers to properly filter announcements, and possibly more. So making this more public might actually be a good thing.
The ability to hijack space is already very well known to anyone in a position to do it, and most of us have accidentally done so at some point in our careers. I know I haxxored 192.168.0.0 by accident once by announcing it to an upstream. Yeah....it happens. And it never should. TO this day, you'll more often than not see RFC1918 space being announced if you get a full routing table.
BGP routing table entry for 192.168.0.0/16, version 3564
Paths: (1 available, best #1, table Default-IP-Routing-Table)
Advertised to non per-group peers:
202.10.0.201 202.10.0.202
Local
192.0.2.1 from 0.0.0.0 (192.189.54.221)
Origin incomplete, metric 0, localpref 101, weight 32768, valid, sourced, best
Community: 2764:20
that is what infant care costs....and why many families have two people working. After child care costs are factored in, it turns out one spouse is making maybe 1 - 3 dollars and hour.
Which I TOTALLY do not understand. I've seen the same thing as well. Why would one of the parents just not STAY HOME WITH THE CHILD? You can probably end up saving more money that way by not paying someone to clean your house, buying actual food (not prepared crap), etc. with the time you have left over.
Because, as we all know it is impossible to raise children if one of the parents doesn't stay at home.
Certainly not impossible, but not what I would consider optimal for young children. I made a choice to go to work, buy a smaller house, drive older cars, and have my wife able to stay at home with the children. If you don't want to make those decisions, no problem. But I would have a problem if I were essentially paid less/received less benefit from a company because other people had decided they could "have it all".
Yes, there are single parents out there. They likely need child care during the day if they don't have a family member to do it. But, again, not my problem.
Slashdot Mirror
If I was driving a high performance car, 75% throttle is burning tires.
You need better tires :)
/. not long ago with someone who was convinced that full acceleration was the most fuel efficient way to accelerate, basically because the throttle body is all the way open, and anything less than that causes drag through the intake. My head assplode at the number of basic things that would need to be taught to this person to grasp how they are wrong. I wish I had though of the vacuum gauge, or, even better a wide band A/F meter. Not that it would have gotten me anywhere with that guy.
But you're right. I got into a retarded discussion on
Make those fuel consumption displays mandatory.
I've got an old (late 85) Porsche 944 project car. It has a fuel economy gauge below the speedo. I had no idea that this would happen, but it actually makes me drive differently. I suspect that it would do that same for many others as well. I find myself easing off when driving to try to keep it over 30 MPG.
Most BMWs since the late 80s or so have had these as well (likely because they were using a similar Bosch engine management system). This stuff isn't hard - you're absolutely correct. I suspect that most american cars don't have them because it would just be depressing. I know I don't want to see a needle on 10MPG all day long when I'm driving my pickup.
Yes.
Montana doesn't have a daytime speed limit. It is "safe and proper".....meaning don't drive dangerously. 100 on a straight stretch of deserted road is just fine. 80 through a highway full oc other cars doing 55 gets you a ticket.
Texas also has rural areas with an 80MH speed limit, and I believe Utah is/was considering the same.
Now, check out the $150 Billion in pork-barrel projects that were added by the Senate to the original 100-page bailout that failed in the House, turning it into a 450-page bailout:
There are two thing that really bother me about these types of things in general. First of all, why are provisions having NOTHING AT ALL to do with the resolution being passed on that resolution. Well, I know why, but why is it allowed. It's slimy.
Secondly, when you go to this bill to get details about these pork sections, they are worded in such a way to make them terribly opaque. One would have to spend over 30 minutes a piece cross referencing other bills, substituting text, striking text, etc. in order to get a real read on what the provision actually MEANS. I have no doubt this is one on purpose.
I recently bought one and was very with the performance and build quality,
I think you accidentally a word.
2.6. And you made baby jesus cry.
Can I have a few of those ribs, please?
You also have to look at MPG/P (yeah...miles per gallon per person). A 12-passenger van that gets 14 MPG full of people will smoke a Prius full of people any day.
It's all about how you drive it and with what. Imagine that - choosing the right vehicle for the job you need to do makes a difference.
See my post above - you didn't go back far enough. 1985 was well into EFI, etc. The big gains were made when they went from carburetors to EFI.
I daresay a new full sized Ford pickup truck gets better mileage than a 1975 full sized Ford of the same model.
I used to have a 1974 F-250. It weighed a ton, could pull down a house (.511 rears and a granny gear 4-speed), and had a 390 with a 4-barrel carb on it. It got between 6 and 8 MPG. I remember thinking how funny it was when I got 2 MPG the one day when I was driving around with the plow on. Yeah...that shot was pretty funny when gas was $1.20.
I now have a 97 F250 that I bought new years ago. It produces more power with slightly less torque, but it's no big deal - it still does the same towing jobs just fine. It comfortable, quiet inside (for a truck), has powere everything, air conditioning, etc. It gets 16 MPG. The only time it gets 8 is when I'm pulling a 24' RV trailer through hilly areas.
Yeah...I'd say the auto manufacturers are getting better at this.
Oh yeah....the '74 needed a new motor at 80,000 miles. The '97 has over 200k on it and it's reasonably fine still.
Very few of us buy routers "every few years".
My point wasn't entirely clear: I'm not saying they don't exist. But the vast majority of routers out there that are passing packets right now that COULD pass IPv6 can only do it in software. Mine definitely included. This is yet another barrier where you'll have to show me the money before I'll consider upgrading (I'm a wholesale VoIP provider that passes about 200 MBit 95th percentile - with redundancy and the ability to pass the insane packet count that VoIP creates puts me in the $40k range for new routers).
What's going to be more expensive: A massive NAT box or an IPv6-enabled router (as many already are)?
The IPv6 router. Take a router that will pass GigE with IPv4 and put IPv6 on it with any sore to sane, normal policies. It will fall on its face at 100 MBit, if even that much. Why? While many routers "support" IPv6, it is software support only, and does not tak advantage of ASICs. etc that we've come to rely on for high bandwidth packet mangling.
Click on "Configure and Buy" from that page and you get:
This section of the Website is compatible with only Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.x and higher. We are presently working on supporting other browsers. Sorry for this inconvenience.
The problem is not that he's a technical manager. It's that he's a bad one.
I should point out that these latter tasks can be copied and pasted straight from properly composed Google queries. They aren't a test of programming knowledge at all, just of the ability to use the Internet. Yet many technical managers will fail and should get the boot as a result. You can't manage what you can't understand.
Show me how to easily take the battery out of an iPhone. Please.
i can personally attest that all the backbone lines that speakeasy runs on are undersold compared to other ISPs.
I think you mean "less oversold".
No doubt. And the fact that using the only RPM package manager I have any interest in using (yum) ends up with them having an out on the support contract. We're a 30 server CentOS shop now. Mostly 5, but some 4 in there still. It works just fine, and, being a tech company, I just don't see the need for a support contract. And because its RHEL, all the stupid Dell DMI/Openmanage/firmware updates work just fine.
And then there's that whole pesky static pressure issue. Like if the building isn't sealed up much, you're creating a seriously negative pressure in the server room and dragging all the a/c in. Or if it's well sealed, you won't move much air out of the racks at all.
iShitting will allow serious shitters to compete in such areas as Stench, Log Size, Color, and Composition (with bonus points awarded for visible undigested food, gum, etc).
You're the one writing that? I'm the guy in the dev forums making the "gum 'n pennies" and the "Corn! When did you have corn?" plug ins.
That wasn't a route view from my network. It was from the first public looking glass I happened to click on in y bookmarks.
The NSA doesn't need stupid BGP tricks to eavesdrop on Internet traffic. They can take over rooms at peering point and put in optical splitters to their heart's content.
Anyone who knows anything about basic Internet protocols should be shitting themselves right about now.
And those of us who actually do this stuff for a living (who already knew at least most of this) are neither surprised, nor any more paranoid about it. As a matter of fact, this might be the sauce needed to get more providers to properly filter announcements, and possibly more. So making this more public might actually be a good thing.
The ability to hijack space is already very well known to anyone in a position to do it, and most of us have accidentally done so at some point in our careers. I know I haxxored 192.168.0.0 by accident once by announcing it to an upstream. Yeah....it happens. And it never should. TO this day, you'll more often than not see RFC1918 space being announced if you get a full routing table.
BGP routing table entry for 192.168.0.0/16, version 3564
Paths: (1 available, best #1, table Default-IP-Routing-Table)
Advertised to non per-group peers:
202.10.0.201 202.10.0.202
Local
192.0.2.1 from 0.0.0.0 (192.189.54.221)
Origin incomplete, metric 0, localpref 101, weight 32768, valid, sourced, best
Community: 2764:20
that is what infant care costs....and why many families have two people working. After child care costs are factored in, it turns out one spouse is making maybe 1 - 3 dollars and hour.
Which I TOTALLY do not understand. I've seen the same thing as well. Why would one of the parents just not STAY HOME WITH THE CHILD? You can probably end up saving more money that way by not paying someone to clean your house, buying actual food (not prepared crap), etc. with the time you have left over.
Because, as we all know it is impossible to raise children if one of the parents doesn't stay at home.
Certainly not impossible, but not what I would consider optimal for young children. I made a choice to go to work, buy a smaller house, drive older cars, and have my wife able to stay at home with the children. If you don't want to make those decisions, no problem. But I would have a problem if I were essentially paid less/received less benefit from a company because other people had decided they could "have it all".
Yes, there are single parents out there. They likely need child care during the day if they don't have a family member to do it. But, again, not my problem.
An easement. Just like it says in the article. The same easement that lets the municipality put in sidewalks, gas lines, and power poles.