Is there anything to stop you/buying/ the repair manuals?
Is there any reason in particular why auto manufacturers should/give/ you detailed information about their (our) products beyond that necessary to use them? Do you apply this logic to all of your purchases? If not, why not?
So you paid 23-203 bucks, in effect (depending on your charge-out rate). Now, add in probability of a screw up or an accident - say cutting your hand, and the fact you had to buy some tools etc etc.
That sounds a bit negative - and I've left out the positives. I rarely take my car in to a workshop, I'd rather fix it myself.
as someone knowledgable above pointed out, the issue is not the fluid boiling while braking that is the problem, this would increase the brake pressure, if anything. The problem is that the heat soaks into the fluid after the braking event, which boils, and this pushes the fluid out of the lines into the reservoir. Then the fluid contracts as it cools, but does not suck the fluid back in, so the next time you hit the brakes the lines are partly empty and you get no brake pressure.
Water in the brake system would boil at around 100 degrees, well, a bit more really since it is under pressure.
Basic brake fluid has a boiling point of 205, dry, and 140, wet
Brake fluid temperatures in the calliper are a bit harder to ascertain - the pads themselves hit 700 C, but there are significant thermal barriers between the pad and the fluid.
Anyway, I suppose what I am saying is that if a 140 degree BP is OK for full performance of the brake system, then the usual driving cycle is unlikely to raise the fluid temp to 100 C. Typical brake app is about 0.3g, whereas the brakes are good for 0.8g. Out of 1 million actual customer braking events we'd see perhaps 3 over 0.6g
What's bullshit? These guys have made a decision and discussed their reasoning.
Do I believe them? On balance, yes. I follow their financial reasoning when buying shares (not surprisingly they get the cream first). Year on year profits for the past five years are about 12% compounded - a margin loan is 8% - you do the math. I did buy my own house for cash, as it happens. That way I could use it as visible security for my (large) margin loan, the interest on which is tax deductible, unlike a mortgage in this jurisdiction.
In fact on rereading your post I don't even understand what you are arguing about. I think we actually agree.
Yes, exactly. It's taken me a while (I'm 43), but for the last couple of years I have been doing the exact technical engineering job that suits me. Part of this is the realisation/acceptance that I am not interested in managing other people. Now, to get this job (it was an internal transfer) I had to use office politics. Eight years ago I wouldn't have bothered, but one good thing from my exposure to management is that I know how to play the game now.
I'm also frighteningly well paid. Funny heh? Compared with my friends in management I get: paid overtime, one day off a month flex time, little stress.
They get a bit more money than me, and a better pension scheme. And have their first heart attack at 55
Can you explain why paying a landlord for the use of his asset (a house) is evil and stupid, whereas paying a bank for the use of their asset (a lump of capital) is clever and mature?
It/ALL/ depends on circumstances. I know some very succesful people who are serious sharemarket investors and many of them rent, on the basis that they don't understand the housing market, so why risk their capital there?
"Believe me when i say that american worker are most productive. if you dont believe me check the statistics yourself. "
I know USAn engineers who claim this. All I know is that we (Australians) consistently get the contracts for the new projects that we bid for, making me think this 'productivity' may be true, per hour (I doubt it) but certainly isn't per dollar.
The first-generation MR2 was introduced during a period of close
cooperation between Lotus and Toyota. The Lotus Eclat was reworked
with some Toyota parts to make the Excel during this period. Toyota
was also involved in design and specification of the M90/X100 prototype.
(Borrowed directly from the Lotus FAQ)
There are two rumors about Lotus' involvement with the MR2. The
"official" rumor is that the MR2 was designed "in-house" at Toyota by
Lotus suspension engineer Roger Becker. The other rumor is that the
MR2 was an abandoned Lotus design (possibly the M90/X100).
According to Doc Bundy, Lotusport Esprit driver, the MR2 is the X100."
OK, I'd sort of go with the Becker thing, but there is no way that 'we' had the resources to design a metal monocoque then, or, to be honest, since. So I'm thinking Bundy is wrong, or exaggerating.
The ride and handling calibration (ie shock valving, spring rates and sta bars) on the original MR2 was performed by Roger Becker, from Lotus, but I think that's about all the direct influence we had on it.
I think you may be confusing this with the commonality between the Lotus Esprit, Lotus Excel, and the Toyota Supra - the Lotii used the brakes and so on from the Supra.
However, I could be wrong, I worked there 1987-1990, so I wasn't actually there when they were owned by Toyota.
I bit the bullet on OO and tried to build a large (say 2000 rows by 20 column) spreadsheet that was a time based simulation of the performance and fuel economy of a car during the standard fuel consumption cycle.
As it got bigger, it got/much/ slower. Load times were very long as well. It did tend to freeze occasionally.
In the end I got sick of it, exported it to Excel, and took it from there.
To OO's credit, the resulting file read into Excel perfectly.
Now the simulator is at least twice as complex as it was under OO, yet still runs much more quickly.
You are absolutely right, I haven't used anything later than Office 2000.
I really like the function builder in OO, I expect Microsoft will copy it. Whoever worked on that deserves a big clap.
We run test cases, and check that we get the same results as last time. We do this with all safety related closed source programs, when each new version comes out.
There is no way that we could read enough of OO's source to check that it was always telling the truth, we'd still have to test it. And every time we got a new version, we'd have to check all that source code all over again.
I agree, to some extent, that we shouldn't use Excel for safety related stuff, but, not for your reasons. Spreadsheets are inherently uncheckable - any random cell in a 30 Mb sheet could include the following pseudocode
The way I get around that is to write robust cells that handle all exceptions, and copy them down the whole sheet. Also, most of my work is correlation based (ie testing analytical models against real data)- so algorythmic errors would tend to show up.
Matlab would probably be a better bet.
Perhaps a more fundamental question is why do I trust Excel more than OO?
Well, if you see the discussions of OO here they usually claim it is a reasonable Excel substitute - despite its obvious lack of speed, stability and features. If the people making those claims are being honest then they can't be pushing it very hard. Therefore they aren't really qualified to comment.
I'm a bit puzzled by people's problems with various levels of Excel, I use 97 at home and a couple of different versions at work, my sheets and VB seems to work fine on all 3 installations.
who posted the parent flamebait actually read what he wrote. The last couple of sentences makes a good point (or at least one I heartily agree with, not necessarily the same thing).
The first half of the post runs somewhat against/. groupthink, but I'd hardly mod it as flamebait.
Switch to optus dialup. Mine's about $30 per month, with 100 free local calls, and 120 hours. So if you use more than 6Mb/hour then you'll be ahead. I/can/ sustain 15 Mb/hour over this connection.
It could be argued that she stopped writing because at that point the story would fork, either Snowman kills the intruders, or he joins them, or, I suppose, he is killed by them. I don't think she's really interested in that sort of story.
I've read (and probably failed to understand) most of Atwood's books, this is a lot more fun than most of her stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, tax is payable at each stage, but you reclaim the tax on inputs.
So for instance, if I buy a PC for $1000+$100VAT, and then sell it for $3000+$300 VAT, I end up paying the gummint $200.
It works better than you might think, in that the end user is the one who actually pays the tax, everybody else in the supply chain just passes it on.
Is there anything to stop you /buying/ the repair manuals?
/give/ you detailed information about their (our) products beyond that necessary to use them? Do you apply this logic to all of your purchases? If not, why not?
Is there any reason in particular why auto manufacturers should
You are welcome to the codes. However, we own the meaning of the codes. You could, of course, buy them.
I assume you have succesfully asked the builder of your house for a set of plans and a copy of the engineer's calculations?
And you have a complete annotated copy of the micro code in your PC?
Sorry, you buy the physical thing, not the plans and the details of its internal workings.
So you paid 23-203 bucks, in effect (depending on your charge-out rate). Now, add in probability of a screw up or an accident - say cutting your hand, and the fact you had to buy some tools etc etc.
That sounds a bit negative - and I've left out the positives. I rarely take my car in to a workshop, I'd rather fix it myself.
That or he isn't working in base 9+1. I write it that way, as every base is base 10 in its own numbers.
as someone knowledgable above pointed out, the issue is not the fluid boiling while braking that is the problem, this would increase the brake pressure, if anything. The problem is that the heat soaks into the fluid after the braking event, which boils, and this pushes the fluid out of the lines into the reservoir. Then the fluid contracts as it cools, but does not suck the fluid back in, so the next time you hit the brakes the lines are partly empty and you get no brake pressure.
Water in the brake system would boil at around 100 degrees, well, a bit more really since it is under pressure.
Basic brake fluid has a boiling point of 205, dry, and 140, wet
Brake fluid temperatures in the calliper are a bit harder to ascertain - the pads themselves hit 700 C, but there are significant thermal barriers between the pad and the fluid.
Anyway, I suppose what I am saying is that if a 140 degree BP is OK for full performance of the brake system, then the usual driving cycle is unlikely to raise the fluid temp to 100 C. Typical brake app is about 0.3g, whereas the brakes are good for 0.8g. Out of 1 million actual customer braking events we'd see perhaps 3 over 0.6g
What's bullshit? These guys have made a decision and discussed their reasoning.
Do I believe them? On balance, yes. I follow their financial reasoning when buying shares (not surprisingly they get the cream first). Year on year profits for the past five years are about 12% compounded - a margin loan is 8% - you do the math. I did buy my own house for cash, as it happens. That way I could use it as visible security for my (large) margin loan, the interest on which is tax deductible, unlike a mortgage in this jurisdiction.
In fact on rereading your post I don't even understand what you are arguing about. I think we actually agree.
Yes, exactly. It's taken me a while (I'm 43), but for the last couple of years I have been doing the exact technical engineering job that suits me. Part of this is the realisation/acceptance that I am not interested in managing other people. Now, to get this job (it was an internal transfer) I had to use office politics. Eight years ago I wouldn't have bothered, but one good thing from my exposure to management is that I know how to play the game now.
I'm also frighteningly well paid. Funny heh? Compared with my friends in management I get: paid overtime, one day off a month flex time, little stress.
They get a bit more money than me, and a better pension scheme. And have their first heart attack at 55
Ah, the famous 'dead money argument'
/ALL/ depends on circumstances. I know some very succesful people who are serious sharemarket investors and many of them rent, on the basis that they don't understand the housing market, so why risk their capital there?
Can you explain why paying a landlord for the use of his asset (a house) is evil and stupid, whereas paying a bank for the use of their asset (a lump of capital) is clever and mature?
It
Jeez, that old Miriam Webster must have it all wrong then:
"Main Entry: droll
Function: adjective
: having a humorous, whimsical, or odd quality"
"Believe me when i say that american worker are most productive. if you dont believe me check the statistics yourself. "
I know USAn engineers who claim this. All I know is that we (Australians) consistently get the contracts for the new projects that we bid for, making me think this 'productivity' may be true, per hour (I doubt it) but certainly isn't per dollar.
So, where do we find these stats?
" The MkI MR2 was introduced in 1985.
From the Lotus Motorsports FAQ:
The first-generation MR2 was introduced during a period of close
cooperation between Lotus and Toyota. The Lotus Eclat was reworked
with some Toyota parts to make the Excel during this period. Toyota
was also involved in design and specification of the M90/X100 prototype.
(Borrowed directly from the Lotus FAQ)
There are two rumors about Lotus' involvement with the MR2. The
"official" rumor is that the MR2 was designed "in-house" at Toyota by
Lotus suspension engineer Roger Becker. The other rumor is that the
MR2 was an abandoned Lotus design (possibly the M90/X100).
According to Doc Bundy, Lotusport Esprit driver, the MR2 is the X100."
OK, I'd sort of go with the Becker thing, but there is no way that 'we' had the resources to design a metal monocoque then, or, to be honest, since. So I'm thinking Bundy is wrong, or exaggerating.
No. Once Toyota sold Lotus there was no 'friends' in it.
The four owners I remember were British Car Auctions, Toyota, GM, and Proton.
The ride and handling calibration (ie shock valving, spring rates and sta bars) on the original MR2 was performed by Roger Becker, from Lotus, but I think that's about all the direct influence we had on it.
I think you may be confusing this with the commonality between the Lotus Esprit, Lotus Excel, and the Toyota Supra - the Lotii used the brakes and so on from the Supra.
However, I could be wrong, I worked there 1987-1990, so I wasn't actually there when they were owned by Toyota.
Ah, OK, I'm not a graphics dude, so I wouldn't know.
I bit the bullet on OO and tried to build a large (say 2000 rows by 20 column) spreadsheet that was a time based simulation of the performance and fuel economy of a car during the standard fuel consumption cycle.
/much/ slower. Load times were very long as well. It did tend to freeze occasionally.
As it got bigger, it got
In the end I got sick of it, exported it to Excel, and took it from there.
To OO's credit, the resulting file read into Excel perfectly.
Now the simulator is at least twice as complex as it was under OO, yet still runs much more quickly.
You are absolutely right, I haven't used anything later than Office 2000.
I really like the function builder in OO, I expect Microsoft will copy it. Whoever worked on that deserves a big clap.
We run test cases, and check that we get the same results as last time. We do this with all safety related closed source programs, when each new version comes out.
i tt lebit))),dodgy result, correctresult)
There is no way that we could read enough of OO's source to check that it was always telling the truth, we'd still have to test it. And every time we got a new version, we'd have to check all that source code all over again.
I agree, to some extent, that we shouldn't use Excel for safety related stuff, but, not for your reasons. Spreadsheets are inherently uncheckable - any random cell in a 30 Mb sheet could include the following pseudocode
=if(and((somecell>anumber),(somecell(anumber+al
The way I get around that is to write robust cells that handle all exceptions, and copy them down the whole sheet. Also, most of my work is correlation based (ie testing analytical models against real data)- so algorythmic errors would tend to show up.
Matlab would probably be a better bet.
Perhaps a more fundamental question is why do I trust Excel more than OO?
Well, if you see the discussions of OO here they usually claim it is a reasonable Excel substitute - despite its obvious lack of speed, stability and features. If the people making those claims are being honest then they can't be pushing it very hard. Therefore they aren't really qualified to comment.
I'm a bit puzzled by people's problems with various levels of Excel, I use 97 at home and a couple of different versions at work, my sheets and VB seems to work fine on all 3 installations.
There again my stuff is big rather than fancy.
who posted the parent flamebait actually read what he wrote. The last couple of sentences makes a good point (or at least one I heartily agree with, not necessarily the same thing).
/. groupthink, but I'd hardly mod it as flamebait.
The first half of the post runs somewhat against
Switch to optus dialup. Mine's about $30 per month, with 100 free local calls, and 120 hours. So if you use more than 6Mb/hour then you'll be ahead. I /can/ sustain 15 Mb/hour over this connection.
"No. If you cared about software you'd notice that the software you want runs on the Mac as well... and usually better versions of it run faster."
Yeah right, try Mathcad, Matlab, ADAMS and FEMAP
Oh, let me guess, you've never heard of them?
...as I believe the young people say.
THT didn't really work as SF, it was far too much concerned with the present day world. As, I suppose, was 1984 when it was written.
Atwood's work has usually struck me as humourless, O&C made a nice change.
I too was puzzled by the ending.
It could be argued that she stopped writing because at that point the story would fork, either Snowman kills the intruders, or he joins them, or, I suppose, he is killed by them. I don't think she's really interested in that sort of story.
I've read (and probably failed to understand) most of Atwood's books, this is a lot more fun than most of her stuff.
"Everyone who buys x86 does so because they think clock speed is performance.
"
Bollocks. Everyone=100% of the sample, in the English language.
I didn't, I bought x86 because the software I want to use doesn't work on a Mac, natively.
I'm sure that applies to many engineers, draftsmen and game players.
How do you get to wear glasses if you are still in the womb?