Shhh, don't tell anyone, but a T1 is just two (or one, depending on span type) DSL circuits and has all the same impairments and limitations as the first two-wire residential DSL standard; which based itself off of two-wire T1 spans.
The difference of course is repeaters for T1s are common place every 3000-5000ft. They exist for xDSL as well but are far more expensive and only ever seen in rural areas.
How long until the first support call because some tool tries a regular network (or hell, even phone...) cable?
It's supposed to work with normal Cat-5e/6 network cable. However the likelihood of Joe Sixpack plugging their HDBaseT into the ethernet port of their computer/switch/modem and frying it with the 100W power going over it is pretty high.
So your brakes can stop your vehicle in 0 seconds from 25 MPH or higher? That's what GP is talking about when s/he said it'd be impossible to comply with.
If you are in the intersection when the light is red the you have run the light. It's really very simple!
There's two rules, and they vary depending on where you live. There's Permissive Yellow, where you're legal if you entered the intersection before the light changed to red, and then there's Restrictive Yellow where you're considered to have run the red light if it changes to red while you're still in the intersection.
In the US most, but not all, states are Permissive Yellow.
they are talking about brakes strong enough to hold the car in place if you have your feet planted on both the accelerator AND the brake at the same time.
Yes. And I'm saying that any car that can't do this is not roadworthy and needs to see a mechanic immediately. Brake systems of basically any modern car are strong enough to do that if properly maintained. Sure, it'll possibly kill the engine and the transmission, but the car won't move.
Only because the traction control system of a car with enough power to break traction on acceleration is preventing it from doing so. '70's muscle cars could overcome their rear brakes just fine, and yet when you stomped on the brakes they'd lock up those same rears just fine too. The modern equivalents can do it too if you turn off/disable the traction control.
Uhhhh... I believe you fail at basic physics. If you can plonk both feet on the pedals and not accelerate, then the breaks can excerpt more force than the engine can (otherwise you'd be accelerating). Given that force equals mass times acceleration, breaks that can excerpt more force than your accelerator will obviously decelerate you faster than your accelerator will accelerate you.
Physics fail yourself. You're forgetting that acceleration is traction and drag limited, while deceleration is traction limited with drag helping you slow down. There's plenty of cars that in the absence of traction control will quite happily spin the drive wheels and produce lots of smoke when you press the gas. There's also plenty of cars (pretty much all) that in the absence of ABS will quite happily lock up the wheels while moving and produce lots of smoke when you press the brakes. The force required to lock up the wheels isn't necessarily more than the engine can produce, it is however all the force required to stop the car if the engine wasn't outputting maximum power.
The brake booster for power brakes has a check valve to keep existing vacuum within the booster even if the engine's wide open or off. There should be enough vacuum to apply the brakes two or three times before the vacuum runs out. Try getting in your car and (without starting the engine) apply the brakes a few times. You should feel them get "hard" after a few times when the vacuum assist is depleted.
And even after that they will still work, you're just now hydraulically linked from pedal to brake pistons.
Turning off the engine I can understand - you lose your power steering and brakes, but neutral is an important safety feature. Are there really cars out there you can't put into neutral???
Except that steering and brakes don't stop working when the engine is off, however you do not have hydraulic boosts to either and no ABS. So yeah, you have to press harder on the pedal and it takes more force to steer, but both still work and shouldn't be a reason for not allowing you to turn off the engine.
The problem isn't anything to do with the breaks not being powerful enough. The issue is that they don't engage at all.
There seems to be a problem with the drive-by-wire computer system where it forces the accelerator on full and stops accepting other input, including the breaks. Pressing the pedal does nothing. It appears you cannot do any of the other obvious things like changing gear to neutral* or turning the engine off.
*Presumably only in automatic cars, manual ones mostly still use mechanical gear shifts.
I'm fairly certain, that in the US at least, that safety regulations require that brake pedal->brakes and steering wheel->wheels must still work even if the engine is turned off and there are no electrics working either.
96khz is major overkill. Find out for yourself, get a tone generator and I can almost guarantee you won't be able to hear 32khz, much less 96. The only reason I know this is because I've done it myself, curious about the whole 32/96 audio thing. Even with a brand new high quality record and a fully capable recording chain I've never seen frequencies much higher than 32khz (even though practically nobody could hear it anyway), in fact they often have considerably worse frequency response than digital audio. By extension, dvd-audio and SACD are a scam (as with most audiophile garbage).
That would be true if you never intended to do anything with the recording other than play it back at exactly the same rate it was recorded. Is it better to have the sampled data at the point you're resampling, or to guess what might have been there from interpolation?
According to that article heterogeneous multi-adapter will work in Vista/W7 if you use XPDM drivers instead of WDDM drivers.
At least that's my understanding of this:
A user could force the installation of a XPDM driver for each of these devices, and therefore get heterogeneous multi-adapter multi-monitor to work as in Windows XP.
And when you do that you won't be able to play DVDs or BluRay or other DRM'd video, either at all or only at reduced resolution, DX10/11 will no longer be available, and depending on your monitor it might stop working because HDCP isn't on.
In other words, using XPDM is *not* a viable option.
Mod parent up. These are all legit deficiencies in ZFS that really need to be fixed at some point. Currently the only solutions to these is to build a new storage pool, either on the same system or different system, and export/import; big PITA and potentially expensive.
Off the top of my head I can't think of anyone that lets you do #2 except enterprise storage solutions and Drobo.
Er, isn't block deduplication really really bad at a hard drive block failure point of view? You'd have to compress or otherwise change the data to have a copy now, or it'd just be marked redundant; if that block where all those redundant nodes are pointing to go bad, all of those files are now bad.
If you were concerned about block level failure or even just drive level failure, you wouldn't be running your ZFS pool without redundancy (mirror or raidz(2)).
Rather than guessing you could just google "width of TV channel".
The answer is 6 megahertz. That's how much room these TV Band Devices (TVBD) will have for communicating over the internet. That's approximately 40 Mbit/s using 16VSB with a theoretical max of 96 Mbit/s if you strip all error correction.
16VSB would be 4 bits/symbol @ 6Msymbols/sec = 24Mbit without error correction (25.85 if you stay with ATSC's symbol rate of 6.46Msymbols/s). The wikipedia article on 16VSB is correct about bits/symbol then fails to get the math right about being "twice the data capacity of 8VSB" which is 3 bits/symbol.
Its not quite that easy to add more space. RAIDZ and RAIDZ2 pools don't support expansion yet, so you have to be using mirroring to achieve expandability. And when you are using mirroring you have to add 2 more drives to expand an existing pool. Even when using mirroring I don't think you can remove drives like you say.
RAIDZ/RAIDZ2 pools are just as expandable as mirror pools in exactly the same way. Either: A. Add an additional RAIDZ/RAIDZ2/Mirror VDEV to the pool at which point the pool automatically expands and you automatically get striping across all VDEVs in the pool. B. Replace all devices that comprise a single VDEV with larger devices one at a time, waiting for a resilver between each device replacement, once all devices are replaced the pool automatically expands.
Not if he's using his nameserver as an authoritative nameserver for one or more domains. You can't list those by hostnames, you have to list them by IP address.
Since when? The NS records of a domain registration are hostnames, the NS records in a zone file are also hostnames. There's nothing stopping you from using somehost.dyndns.org as your NS record in both your domain registration and zone file, and it will work just fine.
A regular PCIe slot would be good for a tv tuner, hba, etc.
How so? It has 10 USB ports and there are dozens of USB tv tuners out there, so that leaves you with network cards and HBA. You won't be adding an HBA to a mini-ITX system which lives in a case barely big enough to hold one 3.5" drive and slim optical. You might have an argument for a network card to turn this into some sort of stupidly over-featured gateway, but there's far better suited mini-ITX boards for doing that.
This board is aimed directly at HTPC, and for that it's only lacking a few things: replace that VGA port with a break-out connector for svideo+composite+component (TV-OUT) so you can use pre-HDCP HDTVs (3 million+ of those) and projectors, and old TVs; toss in a DVI-I->VGA adapter, and replace that eSATA with FireWire so you can record/stream from cable STBs.
You can stream to the PS3 from WMP11. In fact, you can stream to any device that implements the right set of UPnP media functionality.
From the summary:
And no longer will you have to use UPnP media servers
What's even funnier is people who RTFS but don't understand it. What "And no longer will you have to use UPnP media servers" means is you will not have to use a 3rd party UPnP media server as that service (DLNA) will be built into Win7.
The bit about not having to transcode, that's a load of hogwash as the PS3/Xbox360 only support certain subsets of certain codecs, anything that exceeds those subsets MUST be transcoded.
Slashdot Mirror
And looking around my area using that tool. The only map that's correct for the road network isn't on that tool, and that's Waze's map.
Shhh, don't tell anyone, but a T1 is just two (or one, depending on span type) DSL circuits and has all the same impairments and limitations as the first two-wire residential DSL standard; which based itself off of two-wire T1 spans. The difference of course is repeaters for T1s are common place every 3000-5000ft. They exist for xDSL as well but are far more expensive and only ever seen in rural areas.
Can you buy basic necessities? Food, water, shelter?
Yes, as a matter of fact you can
... virtually zero value from an investment standpoint if they can't convert to revenue ...
Like say for instance, Facebook, or Instagram.
How long until the first support call because some tool tries a regular network (or hell, even phone...) cable?
It's supposed to work with normal Cat-5e/6 network cable. However the likelihood of Joe Sixpack plugging their HDBaseT into the ethernet port of their computer/switch/modem and frying it with the 100W power going over it is pretty high.
So your brakes can stop your vehicle in 0 seconds from 25 MPH or higher? That's what GP is talking about when s/he said it'd be impossible to comply with.
If you are in the intersection when the light is red the you have run the light. It's really very simple!
There's two rules, and they vary depending on where you live. There's Permissive Yellow, where you're legal if you entered the intersection before the light changed to red, and then there's Restrictive Yellow where you're considered to have run the red light if it changes to red while you're still in the intersection. In the US most, but not all, states are Permissive Yellow.
they are talking about brakes strong enough to hold the car in place if you have your feet planted on both the accelerator AND the brake at the same time.
Yes. And I'm saying that any car that can't do this is not roadworthy and needs to see a mechanic immediately. Brake systems of basically any modern car are strong enough to do that if properly maintained. Sure, it'll possibly kill the engine and the transmission, but the car won't move.
Only because the traction control system of a car with enough power to break traction on acceleration is preventing it from doing so. '70's muscle cars could overcome their rear brakes just fine, and yet when you stomped on the brakes they'd lock up those same rears just fine too. The modern equivalents can do it too if you turn off/disable the traction control.
Uhhhh... I believe you fail at basic physics. If you can plonk both feet on the pedals and not accelerate, then the breaks can excerpt more force than the engine can (otherwise you'd be accelerating). Given that force equals mass times acceleration, breaks that can excerpt more force than your accelerator will obviously decelerate you faster than your accelerator will accelerate you.
Physics fail yourself. You're forgetting that acceleration is traction and drag limited, while deceleration is traction limited with drag helping you slow down. There's plenty of cars that in the absence of traction control will quite happily spin the drive wheels and produce lots of smoke when you press the gas. There's also plenty of cars (pretty much all) that in the absence of ABS will quite happily lock up the wheels while moving and produce lots of smoke when you press the brakes. The force required to lock up the wheels isn't necessarily more than the engine can produce, it is however all the force required to stop the car if the engine wasn't outputting maximum power.
The brake booster for power brakes has a check valve to keep existing vacuum within the booster even if the engine's wide open or off. There should be enough vacuum to apply the brakes two or three times before the vacuum runs out. Try getting in your car and (without starting the engine) apply the brakes a few times. You should feel them get "hard" after a few times when the vacuum assist is depleted.
And even after that they will still work, you're just now hydraulically linked from pedal to brake pistons.
Turning off the engine I can understand - you lose your power steering and brakes, but neutral is an important safety feature. Are there really cars out there you can't put into neutral???
Except that steering and brakes don't stop working when the engine is off, however you do not have hydraulic boosts to either and no ABS. So yeah, you have to press harder on the pedal and it takes more force to steer, but both still work and shouldn't be a reason for not allowing you to turn off the engine.
The problem isn't anything to do with the breaks not being powerful enough. The issue is that they don't engage at all.
There seems to be a problem with the drive-by-wire computer system where it forces the accelerator on full and stops accepting other input, including the breaks. Pressing the pedal does nothing. It appears you cannot do any of the other obvious things like changing gear to neutral* or turning the engine off.
*Presumably only in automatic cars, manual ones mostly still use mechanical gear shifts.
I'm fairly certain, that in the US at least, that safety regulations require that brake pedal->brakes and steering wheel->wheels must still work even if the engine is turned off and there are no electrics working either.
96khz is major overkill. Find out for yourself, get a tone generator and I can almost guarantee you won't be able to hear 32khz, much less 96. The only reason I know this is because I've done it myself, curious about the whole 32/96 audio thing. Even with a brand new high quality record and a fully capable recording chain I've never seen frequencies much higher than 32khz (even though practically nobody could hear it anyway), in fact they often have considerably worse frequency response than digital audio. By extension, dvd-audio and SACD are a scam (as with most audiophile garbage).
That would be true if you never intended to do anything with the recording other than play it back at exactly the same rate it was recorded. Is it better to have the sampled data at the point you're resampling, or to guess what might have been there from interpolation?
The entire domestic recorded music market is worth less than 14 billion (that's revenue btw, not profit).
So that means the thousands of artists got to split about twenty bucks, right?
According to that article heterogeneous multi-adapter will work in Vista/W7 if you use XPDM drivers instead of WDDM drivers.
At least that's my understanding of this:
A user could force the installation of a XPDM driver for each of these devices, and therefore get heterogeneous multi-adapter multi-monitor to work as in Windows XP.
And when you do that you won't be able to play DVDs or BluRay or other DRM'd video, either at all or only at reduced resolution, DX10/11 will no longer be available, and depending on your monitor it might stop working because HDCP isn't on. In other words, using XPDM is *not* a viable option.
Mod parent up. These are all legit deficiencies in ZFS that really need to be fixed at some point. Currently the only solutions to these is to build a new storage pool, either on the same system or different system, and export/import; big PITA and potentially expensive. Off the top of my head I can't think of anyone that lets you do #2 except enterprise storage solutions and Drobo.
Er, isn't block deduplication really really bad at a hard drive block failure point of view? You'd have to compress or otherwise change the data to have a copy now, or it'd just be marked redundant; if that block where all those redundant nodes are pointing to go bad, all of those files are now bad.
If you were concerned about block level failure or even just drive level failure, you wouldn't be running your ZFS pool without redundancy (mirror or raidz(2)).
Rather than guessing you could just google "width of TV channel".
The answer is 6 megahertz. That's how much room these TV Band Devices (TVBD) will have for communicating over the internet. That's approximately 40 Mbit/s using 16VSB with a theoretical max of 96 Mbit/s if you strip all error correction.
16VSB would be 4 bits/symbol @ 6Msymbols/sec = 24Mbit without error correction (25.85 if you stay with ATSC's symbol rate of 6.46Msymbols/s). The wikipedia article on 16VSB is correct about bits/symbol then fails to get the math right about being "twice the data capacity of 8VSB" which is 3 bits/symbol.
Its not quite that easy to add more space. RAIDZ and RAIDZ2 pools don't support expansion yet, so you have to be using mirroring to achieve expandability. And when you are using mirroring you have to add 2 more drives to expand an existing pool. Even when using mirroring I don't think you can remove drives like you say.
RAIDZ/RAIDZ2 pools are just as expandable as mirror pools in exactly the same way. Either:
A. Add an additional RAIDZ/RAIDZ2/Mirror VDEV to the pool at which point the pool automatically expands and you automatically get striping across all VDEVs in the pool.
B. Replace all devices that comprise a single VDEV with larger devices one at a time, waiting for a resilver between each device replacement, once all devices are replaced the pool automatically expands.
I closed my Paypal account years ago after I had an issue with an item that had obviously been soiled, broken, repackaged and re-shrink-wrapped.
I thought everyone knew not to buy their underwear from eBay.
Not if he's using his nameserver as an authoritative nameserver for one or more domains. You can't list those by hostnames, you have to list them by IP address.
Since when? The NS records of a domain registration are hostnames, the NS records in a zone file are also hostnames. There's nothing stopping you from using somehost.dyndns.org as your NS record in both your domain registration and zone file, and it will work just fine.
As they refine their data they'll find Firefox's uptake will slowly increase and overtake IE market share on December 12th 2012.
A regular PCIe slot would be good for a tv tuner, hba, etc.
How so? It has 10 USB ports and there are dozens of USB tv tuners out there, so that leaves you with network cards and HBA. You won't be adding an HBA to a mini-ITX system which lives in a case barely big enough to hold one 3.5" drive and slim optical. You might have an argument for a network card to turn this into some sort of stupidly over-featured gateway, but there's far better suited mini-ITX boards for doing that.
This board is aimed directly at HTPC, and for that it's only lacking a few things: replace that VGA port with a break-out connector for svideo+composite+component (TV-OUT) so you can use pre-HDCP HDTVs (3 million+ of those) and projectors, and old TVs; toss in a DVI-I->VGA adapter, and replace that eSATA with FireWire so you can record/stream from cable STBs.
PS3 only reads DLNA not UPNP.
DLNA is a local network service discovered via UPnP.
I think it's funny when people don't even RTFS...
You can stream to the PS3 from WMP11. In fact, you can stream to any device that implements the right set of UPnP media functionality.
From the summary:
And no longer will you have to use UPnP media servers
What's even funnier is people who RTFS but don't understand it. What "And no longer will you have to use UPnP media servers" means is you will not have to use a 3rd party UPnP media server as that service (DLNA) will be built into Win7.
The bit about not having to transcode, that's a load of hogwash as the PS3/Xbox360 only support certain subsets of certain codecs, anything that exceeds those subsets MUST be transcoded.