This numbers are an extrapolation of my current diesel engine, maybe electric engines performs better that gas engines, and they can do more with less energy, I just don't know it.
They can.
Electric motor efficiency (skipping externalities) approaches 95%; 90% is not at all unreasonable. Heat engines of various types top out at 33% in most cases, with internal combustion engines at the bottom of the heap, typically around 20% (though 33% is not unheard of in ideal conditions - cars are, by definition, not ideal conditions).
On a sode note, you can sometimes gain some efficiency by using waste heat from one heat engine to drive another heat engine. Combined-cycle power plants work on this priniciple, using waste heat from a gas-turbine engine to generate steam for a steam turbine. These systems hit 50-55% efficiency. This efficiency, plus the fuel-agnostic nature of the power grid (including the ability to use renewables), is where the real promise for electric cars lies.
What kind of service will allow you to suck down $9 worth of electricity in 5 minutes?
Good point. Let me slap some math on it.
At $0.25/kWh, $9 is 36kWh. You would have to pass 432kW of power. At 120, 240, 480 and 600 volts, this would be a current of 3600A, 1800A, 900A and 720A, respectively.
At $0.04/kWh, it is much worse. At that price, $9 buys 225kWh, which, to pass in 5 minutes, requires a power of 2.7MW. At the same voltages as above, this would be 22.5kA, 11.25kA, 5.63kA and 4.5kA, respectively.
Hell, even at 13.2kV, this would be a fairly big current, somewhere between 32 and 205 Amps.
Well considering the journalist who wrote the article is based out of San Francisco, I would assume its based off the cost per kilowatt hour in San Francisco.
I'll say the same thing here that I said on tribe.net when this came up.... How much electricity is "$9 worth"? Is that at 4 cents per kWh, or 25 cents per kWh? Electricity is found at both thos prices, and every price in between, in different places in the US, and I want to know how much electricity this car uses, not how much it costs some undefined person at some undefined location.
If you would like to improve the dynamic range, I would suggest applying oversampling post-shooting. You want 10^6 levels? Great. Let's approximate that as 2^20. Now, take the existing 2^8. Every doubling of pixels you combine into (averaging them) one adds one bit to each colour plane. Take the 160Mpx and decimate it to 39kpx, and you will have your dynamic range
Perhaps being more realistic with this unrealistic hardware, you could decimate the picture down to about 4Mpx, giving you a dynamic range of 2^14 levels.... not quite human eyesight range, but rather respectable.
If you get a call asking for a donation to a charity, beware!
I am a fairly generous person, and I made donations in response to several of these calls. The problem is that I started getting calls from many more charities than I donated to that began with "thank you for your donatin in the past." When I say many more, I mean at least an order of magnitude more.
Next, I happened to have two of the return envelopes in my hand at the same time and noticed that the addresses were extremely similar, so rather than send them in, I sat on them for a while and started to notice that all of these charities had only two or three addresses.
Next, I started researching this. I found a report from the NY attourney general about the scandalously small portions of the donations that make their way to the named charity. Typically, the charity gets 25%, give or take 15%. In some very rare cases, it is even worse.
This has lead me to a ritual whenever I get such a request.
Understand that you are dealing with salespeople here. There are honest salespeople, and there are dishonest salespeople. The dishonest ones do not believe that the truth has anything to do with achieving their objectives, so you may have to perform a sort of impromptu cross-examination here.
I generally try to be polite, but this doesn't always work.
First, interrupt the spiel. Ask the operator if he/she is a professional fundraiser. Most will reply "yes", some will try to dance around the subject. If they dance around it, define professional for them, and ask the question again. On one occasion, an operator told me that he was not, so I clarified it by asking, "Are you telling me that you are a volunteer, that you receive no payment except for the warmth in your heart of doing a good deed?" That got the answer I was expecting, that he did, indeed, draw a wage, to which I said, "then you are a professional fundraiser."
Now ask the operator what percentage goes to the charity. You will get a non-response response, something like "It's a 75/25 split." The only exception I have encountered to this has been on the handful of occasions when I have been told that I need to call a different number (which, BTW, doesn't get answered) if I want to know that.
In the case where they tell me the split, I press for an answer to which part of the split goes to the charity. This will inevitably get a spiel back about how it would be nice to be able to give 100%, but because of staffing, postage, telecom costs, blah blah blah, only 25% can go to the charity. This is where I tell them that that is too little, and that I have no intentions of paying them $7.50 (or whatever) to give $charity $2.50 on my behalf. Sometimes they will continue to try to convince me, but at this point, I stand firm.
The other case is easier. When I am told the other phone number that I must call to get an answer to this question that really should be in the hands of the operators already, my response is that if they can't answer a basic question like that, then I won't donate through them.
Last, but not least, let me suggest that you pick a charity or two, of your own accord, and donate to it.
Arguable. I do see where you are coming from, and I grant that if you are using it strictly for watching video or viewing digital photos that if the source material were 4:3, then you would lose some screen real estate on the 1920x1080 display to pillarboxing, and if it were 16:9 then you would lose some to letterboxing.
That said, the OP was comparing to computer screen resolutions. Both of these are valid computer screen resolutions, and in operating in a windowing environment (don't care what GUI or OS), the "source material" aspect ratio tends to be arbitrary and can be reconfigured in an instant by dragging the corner of a window.
Now, let me play devil's advocate here. There is an assumption in your statement that the pixels are always square. Computer displays do not always use square pixels. Witness: 1280x1024, used on 4:3 monitors, but it has a 5:4 pixel ratio. Witness: 1280x768, used on 16:9 monitors, but it has a 10:6 pixel ratio. TV displays also don't always use square pixels, witness: 352x240, 480x480, 704x480, 720x480, with their ratios of 22:15, 1:1, 22:15 and 3:2 respectively. Who is to say that we aren't running 1600x1200 on a 16:9 monitor or 1920x1080 on a 4:3 monitor, both of which I have seen done (though usually not well)?
Now, don't get me wrong, I understand your point about losing real estate to {pillar|letter}boxing, but when you introduce a notion of 1600x1200, you're no longer in the realm of television, having moved to the realm of computer displays. I picked the two resolutions I did because they are, actually, very close (both in the 2Mpx range) and because it demonstrates the issue in trying to cipher out X by Y resoltuions versus ones that state Y with an implicit X.
But yeah, they should clarify resolution with the same numbers used in computer monitor displays, such as 1280x960. 480p, EDTV, 540p, etcetera does not tell me much and isn't intuitive. But anyone can see 1280x960 is better than 640x480 which is better than 320x240.
480i = 640x480, 704x480, or, in the case of DVD, 720x480, interlaced
480p = 640x480, 704x480, or, in the case of DVD, 720x480, progressive.
540p = 960x540, progressive (1/4 of 1080p)
720p = 1280x720, progressive.
1080i = 1920x1080, interlaced.
1080p = 1920x1080, progressive.
1080p at 60 frames/sec is outside of the ATSC spec, but I think the HDDVD and BD formats support it.... don't quote me. 540p is also outside of the ATSC spec.
Within the ATSC spec, all of the interlaced modes are 30 frames/sec. The progressive modes (except 1080p) can be 24, 30 or 60 frames/sec. 1080p can be 24 or 30 frames/sec.
The thing to note is that except for the 480 modes, the pixels are square. For this reason, you can use the Y value (540, 720, 1080) and multiply it by 16/9 (the aspect ratio of the screen) to get the X value.
Now, my challenge to you: Which is higher resolution, 1920x1080 or 1600x1200? You may not use a calculator.
By comparison, which is higher resolution, 1080p or 720p? You won't need a calculator.
On a round trip from Albany, NY to Tulsa, OK in 2002, I was "randomly" selected five times out of six opportunities (there were two layovers each way).
As for appearances, I was 31 at the time. I am a white male, a bit on the short side at 164cm (5'4"), slightly pudgy at 68kg (150 lb), and I have a short and moderately conservative haircut. I was dressed in jeans and a T-shirt going south, and windbreakers and a T-shirt going north. In short, I looked "average".
I do effect a slight Toronto accent, but that would not have been noticed by anyone prior to my selection, as I had not been speaking to anyone official up to that point. For that matter, I tend to pick up a bit of a twang when I visit my family in Tulsa (or when they visit me), so I'd probably stick out even less.
Between one out of three and one out of five passengers were selected at each airport, meaning that, at most, I should have been selected twice for it not to be a statistical anomoly. Three is pushing it. Five is a pretty damned serious outlier.
Now, I wish I knew, seriously, what it was that caused them to choose me. I suppose it is possible that a ticket clerk near the start of the process might have tagged me at check-in; who knows? I don't remember at this point in time whether or not they examined my boarding pass before "randomly" choosing me.
I'm not denying that 1 Watt amplifiers are totally leagal, but doesn't that imply that the antenna is going to be low-gain in order to meet the field strength limits?
As a DSSS system, 802.11 is regulated on a power/gain rather than field strength basis. You can have up to a 6dB antenna gain before you have to start peeling back you transmitter power to comply.
From there, if you have a point-to-multipoint system (which is what this box would be), you need to drop back dB-for-dB for every dB over 6. For example, with a 9dB antenna, you need to trim back transmitter power by 3dB, bringing you down to 500mW.
As long as the antenna is under 6dBi gain, he is legal.
This calls for physically disabling your microphone whenever you are not specifically using it, just to prevent inadvertent transmission.
On a desktop, just unplug the mic.
On a laptop, go to Radio Shack or equivalent and get a 3.5mm (or 1/8") headphone plug from the parts drawers. Just get the cheapest one you can find. Insert it into the mic jack on the side of your laptop and this will switch out the built-in mic.
Problem solved, and nobody needs to change their OS or other software.
This is one of the things I like about Road Runner.
I was quoted $44.95/month.
My bill is $44.95/month.
See the connection? No fees, no taxes, no charges besides the $44.95/month. The service is pretty good, too.
Now, before someone suggests that I look at my cable bill for the hidden fees, or asks about what I pay for my cable service, I think I should point out that I do not subscribe to cable (I get my TV fix through Dish Network). It is not well known, but you can unbundle Road Runner from TW Cable TV, and I have done so. When you do so, you will pay exactly $44.95/month for the middle-tier Road Runner residential service, and not a cent more.
Build the machine in a well-insulated enclosure. Add a heater. Arrange a thermostat-controlled requirement that the internal temperature of the enclosure be within the normal operating range of the computer before it is able to get power to boot. Require that it be within that range for a minimum length of time to allow for temperature stabilisation. Allow ventillation on demand (shutters) so that the computer can avail itself of the cooler outside environment if it gets too warm in the enclosure.
I wonder if there might be some value to placing the computer in an oil bath of some sort? If you were to circulate oil over the computers that was kept at a reasonable temperature, it would provide both heating and cooling to the computers, and also maintain a good thermal distribution across the whole machine.
Re:OT: Wikipedia down, what happened?
on
Divine Proportions
·
· Score: 1
Wikipedia is down ATM with no explanation other than technical difficulties. All subdomains are affected, too.
Ten minutes have passed since you posted that, and I am seeing Wikipedia just fine.
The Dish Network management knows how to use their customers as leverage. Every time there is a contract dispute between a program provider and Dish, they make sure that it is clear to the customer how to contact that program provider and pitch a bitch.
I would be surprised if a similar tactic didn't get applied here.
Actually, you've got that backwards. Dish Network is a brand held by Echostar. There exists no company called "Dish network".
As an analogy, there is no company called "Crunch", yet candy bars appear on the shelves of stores with that name clearly printed in large red letters. Looking closer, you find that the word "Nestle" appears also on the label, and that is the company.
Looking on the back of any Dish Network receiver, you will find a tag identifying it as a product of Echostar Technologies.
It makes it much easier to type strings of variables in a BASH script, such as ${LD_LIBRARY_PATH_32} when you don't have to hold down the shift key.
I'll agree that it's in the wrong place, though. Didn't the IBM XT have it somewhwere down on the bottom left corner.... I think where Control is on a modern KB and vice-versa?
Sounds like poor management on the part of your local deli. RRP is consistent. The sub I usually order (veggie with cheese) is $3.59, period. It would be close to that at Subway, but (as I mentioned before) completely gutless.
Also, the tracks are almost all owned by the freight companies so their trains get right of way.
Of course, I think that this is the way it should be anyway, regardless of track ownership, for the simple reason that a passenger train, having a much higher torque to weight ratio (mostly due to less weight), can start and stop much more readily than a freight train.
Slashdot Mirror
This numbers are an extrapolation of my current diesel engine, maybe electric engines performs better that gas engines, and they can do more with less energy, I just don't know it.
They can.
Electric motor efficiency (skipping externalities) approaches 95%; 90% is not at all unreasonable. Heat engines of various types top out at 33% in most cases, with internal combustion engines at the bottom of the heap, typically around 20% (though 33% is not unheard of in ideal conditions - cars are, by definition, not ideal conditions).
On a sode note, you can sometimes gain some efficiency by using waste heat from one heat engine to drive another heat engine. Combined-cycle power plants work on this priniciple, using waste heat from a gas-turbine engine to generate steam for a steam turbine. These systems hit 50-55% efficiency. This efficiency, plus the fuel-agnostic nature of the power grid (including the ability to use renewables), is where the real promise for electric cars lies.
What kind of service will allow you to suck down $9 worth of electricity in 5 minutes?
Good point. Let me slap some math on it.
At $0.25/kWh, $9 is 36kWh. You would have to pass 432kW of power. At 120, 240, 480 and 600 volts, this would be a current of 3600A, 1800A, 900A and 720A, respectively.
At $0.04/kWh, it is much worse. At that price, $9 buys 225kWh, which, to pass in 5 minutes, requires a power of 2.7MW. At the same voltages as above, this would be 22.5kA, 11.25kA, 5.63kA and 4.5kA, respectively.
Hell, even at 13.2kV, this would be a fairly big current, somewhere between 32 and 205 Amps.
I'll take the slower charge, thank you very much.
Well considering the journalist who wrote the article is based out of San Francisco, I would assume its based off the cost per kilowatt hour in San Francisco.
That's not much.
I'll say the same thing here that I said on tribe.net when this came up.... How much electricity is "$9 worth"? Is that at 4 cents per kWh, or 25 cents per kWh? Electricity is found at both thos prices, and every price in between, in different places in the US, and I want to know how much electricity this car uses, not how much it costs some undefined person at some undefined location.
You're right; I blew a brain fart. My bad.
If you would like to improve the dynamic range, I would suggest applying oversampling post-shooting. You want 10^6 levels? Great. Let's approximate that as 2^20. Now, take the existing 2^8. Every doubling of pixels you combine into (averaging them) one adds one bit to each colour plane. Take the 160Mpx and decimate it to 39kpx, and you will have your dynamic range
Perhaps being more realistic with this unrealistic hardware, you could decimate the picture down to about 4Mpx, giving you a dynamic range of 2^14 levels.... not quite human eyesight range, but rather respectable.
If you get a call asking for a donation to a charity, beware!
I am a fairly generous person, and I made donations in response to several of these calls. The problem is that I started getting calls from many more charities than I donated to that began with "thank you for your donatin in the past." When I say many more, I mean at least an order of magnitude more.
Next, I happened to have two of the return envelopes in my hand at the same time and noticed that the addresses were extremely similar, so rather than send them in, I sat on them for a while and started to notice that all of these charities had only two or three addresses.
Next, I started researching this. I found a report from the NY attourney general about the scandalously small portions of the donations that make their way to the named charity. Typically, the charity gets 25%, give or take 15%. In some very rare cases, it is even worse.
This has lead me to a ritual whenever I get such a request.
Understand that you are dealing with salespeople here. There are honest salespeople, and there are dishonest salespeople. The dishonest ones do not believe that the truth has anything to do with achieving their objectives, so you may have to perform a sort of impromptu cross-examination here.
I generally try to be polite, but this doesn't always work.
First, interrupt the spiel. Ask the operator if he/she is a professional fundraiser. Most will reply "yes", some will try to dance around the subject. If they dance around it, define professional for them, and ask the question again. On one occasion, an operator told me that he was not, so I clarified it by asking, "Are you telling me that you are a volunteer, that you receive no payment except for the warmth in your heart of doing a good deed?" That got the answer I was expecting, that he did, indeed, draw a wage, to which I said, "then you are a professional fundraiser."
Now ask the operator what percentage goes to the charity. You will get a non-response response, something like "It's a 75/25 split." The only exception I have encountered to this has been on the handful of occasions when I have been told that I need to call a different number (which, BTW, doesn't get answered) if I want to know that.
In the case where they tell me the split, I press for an answer to which part of the split goes to the charity. This will inevitably get a spiel back about how it would be nice to be able to give 100%, but because of staffing, postage, telecom costs, blah blah blah, only 25% can go to the charity. This is where I tell them that that is too little, and that I have no intentions of paying them $7.50 (or whatever) to give $charity $2.50 on my behalf. Sometimes they will continue to try to convince me, but at this point, I stand firm.
The other case is easier. When I am told the other phone number that I must call to get an answer to this question that really should be in the hands of the operators already, my response is that if they can't answer a basic question like that, then I won't donate through them.
Last, but not least, let me suggest that you pick a charity or two, of your own accord, and donate to it.
It depends. Is the source material 16:9 or 4:3?
Arguable. I do see where you are coming from, and I grant that if you are using it strictly for watching video or viewing digital photos that if the source material were 4:3, then you would lose some screen real estate on the 1920x1080 display to pillarboxing, and if it were 16:9 then you would lose some to letterboxing.
That said, the OP was comparing to computer screen resolutions. Both of these are valid computer screen resolutions, and in operating in a windowing environment (don't care what GUI or OS), the "source material" aspect ratio tends to be arbitrary and can be reconfigured in an instant by dragging the corner of a window.
Now, let me play devil's advocate here. There is an assumption in your statement that the pixels are always square. Computer displays do not always use square pixels. Witness: 1280x1024, used on 4:3 monitors, but it has a 5:4 pixel ratio. Witness: 1280x768, used on 16:9 monitors, but it has a 10:6 pixel ratio. TV displays also don't always use square pixels, witness: 352x240, 480x480, 704x480, 720x480, with their ratios of 22:15, 1:1, 22:15 and 3:2 respectively. Who is to say that we aren't running 1600x1200 on a 16:9 monitor or 1920x1080 on a 4:3 monitor, both of which I have seen done (though usually not well)?
Now, don't get me wrong, I understand your point about losing real estate to {pillar|letter}boxing, but when you introduce a notion of 1600x1200, you're no longer in the realm of television, having moved to the realm of computer displays. I picked the two resolutions I did because they are, actually, very close (both in the 2Mpx range) and because it demonstrates the issue in trying to cipher out X by Y resoltuions versus ones that state Y with an implicit X.
But yeah, they should clarify resolution with the same numbers used in computer monitor displays, such as 1280x960. 480p, EDTV, 540p, etcetera does not tell me much and isn't intuitive. But anyone can see 1280x960 is better than 640x480 which is better than 320x240.
480i = 640x480, 704x480, or, in the case of DVD, 720x480, interlaced
480p = 640x480, 704x480, or, in the case of DVD, 720x480, progressive.
540p = 960x540, progressive (1/4 of 1080p)
720p = 1280x720, progressive.
1080i = 1920x1080, interlaced.
1080p = 1920x1080, progressive.
1080p at 60 frames/sec is outside of the ATSC spec, but I think the HDDVD and BD formats support it.... don't quote me. 540p is also outside of the ATSC spec.
Within the ATSC spec, all of the interlaced modes are 30 frames/sec. The progressive modes (except 1080p) can be 24, 30 or 60 frames/sec. 1080p can be 24 or 30 frames/sec.
The thing to note is that except for the 480 modes, the pixels are square. For this reason, you can use the Y value (540, 720, 1080) and multiply it by 16/9 (the aspect ratio of the screen) to get the X value.
Now, my challenge to you: Which is higher resolution, 1920x1080 or 1600x1200? You may not use a calculator.
By comparison, which is higher resolution, 1080p or 720p? You won't need a calculator.
On a round trip from Albany, NY to Tulsa, OK in 2002, I was "randomly" selected five times out of six opportunities (there were two layovers each way).
As for appearances, I was 31 at the time. I am a white male, a bit on the short side at 164cm (5'4"), slightly pudgy at 68kg (150 lb), and I have a short and moderately conservative haircut. I was dressed in jeans and a T-shirt going south, and windbreakers and a T-shirt going north. In short, I looked "average".
I do effect a slight Toronto accent, but that would not have been noticed by anyone prior to my selection, as I had not been speaking to anyone official up to that point. For that matter, I tend to pick up a bit of a twang when I visit my family in Tulsa (or when they visit me), so I'd probably stick out even less.
Between one out of three and one out of five passengers were selected at each airport, meaning that, at most, I should have been selected twice for it not to be a statistical anomoly. Three is pushing it. Five is a pretty damned serious outlier.
Now, I wish I knew, seriously, what it was that caused them to choose me. I suppose it is possible that a ticket clerk near the start of the process might have tagged me at check-in; who knows? I don't remember at this point in time whether or not they examined my boarding pass before "randomly" choosing me.
I'm not denying that 1 Watt amplifiers are totally leagal, but doesn't that imply that the antenna is going to be low-gain in order to meet the field strength limits?
As a DSSS system, 802.11 is regulated on a power/gain rather than field strength basis. You can have up to a 6dB antenna gain before you have to start peeling back you transmitter power to comply.
From there, if you have a point-to-multipoint system (which is what this box would be), you need to drop back dB-for-dB for every dB over 6. For example, with a 9dB antenna, you need to trim back transmitter power by 3dB, bringing you down to 500mW.
As long as the antenna is under 6dBi gain, he is legal.
This calls for physically disabling your microphone whenever you are not specifically using it, just to prevent inadvertent transmission.
On a desktop, just unplug the mic.
On a laptop, go to Radio Shack or equivalent and get a 3.5mm (or 1/8") headphone plug from the parts drawers. Just get the cheapest one you can find. Insert it into the mic jack on the side of your laptop and this will switch out the built-in mic.
Problem solved, and nobody needs to change their OS or other software.
The one watt amplifiers mentioned in the article almost guarantees that this device is operating outside the FCC part 15 rules.
False.
802.11 is considered to be direct sequence spread-spectrum. According to 47 CFR 15.247(b)(3), the limit is 1W for this purpose.
This is one of the things I like about Road Runner.
I was quoted $44.95/month.
My bill is $44.95/month.
See the connection? No fees, no taxes, no charges besides the $44.95/month. The service is pretty good, too.
Now, before someone suggests that I look at my cable bill for the hidden fees, or asks about what I pay for my cable service, I think I should point out that I do not subscribe to cable (I get my TV fix through Dish Network). It is not well known, but you can unbundle Road Runner from TW Cable TV, and I have done so. When you do so, you will pay exactly $44.95/month for the middle-tier Road Runner residential service, and not a cent more.
In Soviet Russia, Space Station buys you!
It is but a mir space station....
First?
I don't want a touch screen. In fact, that is the precise antithesis of what I want.
I want a cell phone that has few to no menus. I want to be able to operate it without looking, by feeling the keypad.
I don't care if the screen is even in colour, because I'm not going to be looking at it if I don't have to.
I also want to be able to connect it to my computer as a USB modem.
I have been asking for this for upwards of four years. Can I have that, please?
Build the machine in a well-insulated enclosure. Add a heater. Arrange a thermostat-controlled requirement that the internal temperature of the enclosure be within the normal operating range of the computer before it is able to get power to boot. Require that it be within that range for a minimum length of time to allow for temperature stabilisation. Allow ventillation on demand (shutters) so that the computer can avail itself of the cooler outside environment if it gets too warm in the enclosure.
I wonder if there might be some value to placing the computer in an oil bath of some sort? If you were to circulate oil over the computers that was kept at a reasonable temperature, it would provide both heating and cooling to the computers, and also maintain a good thermal distribution across the whole machine.
Wikipedia is down ATM with no explanation other than technical difficulties. All subdomains are affected, too.
Ten minutes have passed since you posted that, and I am seeing Wikipedia just fine.
This would not be a first time for Dish.
The Dish Network management knows how to use their customers as leverage. Every time there is a contract dispute between a program provider and Dish, they make sure that it is clear to the customer how to contact that program provider and pitch a bitch.
I would be surprised if a similar tactic didn't get applied here.
Dish Network owns EchoStar.
Actually, you've got that backwards. Dish Network is a brand held by Echostar. There exists no company called "Dish network".
As an analogy, there is no company called "Crunch", yet candy bars appear on the shelves of stores with that name clearly printed in large red letters. Looking closer, you find that the word "Nestle" appears also on the label, and that is the company.
Looking on the back of any Dish Network receiver, you will find a tag identifying it as a product of Echostar Technologies.
I vote for keeping it.
It makes it much easier to type strings of variables in a BASH script, such as ${LD_LIBRARY_PATH_32} when you don't have to hold down the shift key.
I'll agree that it's in the wrong place, though. Didn't the IBM XT have it somewhwere down on the bottom left corner.... I think where Control is on a modern KB and vice-versa?
what service I wonder.
Well, being GSM, that would mean either AT&T/Cingular or T-Mobile.
My method is similar, but looks like this:
lav2yuv INPUT.avi | yuvdeinterlace | mpeg2enc -f 8 -o VIDEO.mpg
ffmpeg -i INPUT.avi -ab 384 -o AUDIO.ac3
mplex -f8 VIDEO.mpg AUDIO.ac3 -o OUTPUT.vob
dvdauthor -o dvd -t -v 4:3 01.mpg
dvdauthor -o dvd -T
This will produce a set of directories like you normally find on a DVD. Now, you need to branch on whether or not the dvd directory is over4.7GB.
If not:
growisofs -Z /dev/dvd -dvd-video dvd
...will burn the DVD.
If it is, then you can use DVDShrink under WINE to reduce the video. At anything over 60 minutes, you will need to do this.
Sounds like poor management on the part of your local deli. RRP is consistent. The sub I usually order (veggie with cheese) is $3.59, period. It would be close to that at Subway, but (as I mentioned before) completely gutless.
Also, the tracks are almost all owned by the freight companies so their trains get right of way.
Of course, I think that this is the way it should be anyway, regardless of track ownership, for the simple reason that a passenger train, having a much higher torque to weight ratio (mostly due to less weight), can start and stop much more readily than a freight train.