it is a skinny puppy reference. At one time I may have been the largest skinny puppy fan on the planet. They still are my favorite band, but my tastes have shifted a little over the years.
I just designed a wooden shelf for holding LP's. It probably won't be as big as you'd need, but more could easily be attached. It will be made completly out of one sheet (4'x8') of MDF, although any wood would work. It calls for 3 shelves: 16" wide, 16" deep, and 22" high. The beauty of it is that I should be able to build it cheap, and if I need to expand can just hook an identical shelf next to it. I'm probably going to go with MDF, just because it can be painted to match the rest of my furniture.
wow... and I thought we were bad. My GF and I combined our collections and we only ended up with about 500 CD's and probably 100 LP's. Not to mention all the DVD's and video's. We had to buy a special media cabinet from IKEA that can be configured for about 900 CD's and for video's and DVD's. We still haven't found anything to replace the milk crates for the LP's though.
actually SACD and DVD-A weren't developed to battle illegal downloading. They do have protections built in to combat it, but they really are a ploy to get you to replace your entire music collection again. People have already replaced all their LPs with CDs, so it's time for a new format. I'm all for the new format, I really do think they add things to the mix; however, most of my cd's will probably never be re-released in the format and wouldn't benifit even if they were. I had been waiting to make the plunge until the format war ended, but with universal players now becoming cheap; it looks like the two formats will coexist for quite some time. I must say being a signals guy at heart that SACD seems a very elegant solution, too bad it's proprietary.
If it can't be heard, it is, by definition, inaudible.
Inaudible yes, imperceptible no. You see, just because you can't here something doesn't mean you can't perceive it. Many instruments display much of their energy at frequencies that are inaudible to humans. However, there are studies that show that people can perceive these frequencies. I can't provide a link, but I have read a study that showed people preffered the sound of a cymbal recorded at 96 kHz versus one recorded at 44.1 kHz. This was because most of the energy of the cymbal is actually inaudible, yet somehow the listeners were able to pick up on it and their brain decided it sounded more real.
But when people are downloading and storing to hard disk, there is a cost in time and storage. It's no problem for those of us with huge hard drives and broadband connections, but I'd hate to see music made inaccessible to those with dial-up connections and more modest storage.
Storage is quickly becoming a moot point, I wouldn't worry about that. Connection speed however is still a problem for most. What I would like to see is a service that offers compressed audio in a couple of different bit rates and makes, lossless compression available. If for instance I could download a 96kbs MP3 for free and then have the oppertunity to pay for a lossless file or a high quality MP3, I'd be all for it. The reason I'm not going to use any of the pay for download systems now is that it doesn't give me the option of keeping a lossless archive of the music. If some other lossy compression scheme comes about latter, I can't convert my collection well unless I have lossless archives.
No one knows why the mayans and aztecs never improved on the wheel. An interesting study would be to see if cultures that did independently develop the wheel developed hand carts before they developed carts for draft animals.
You are using modern concepts. Think about the other writing systems that were around. Elaborte pictographs or cuniforms carved into clay tablets. How much more efficient are those than this system? To make paper you need specific kinds of natural resources, and I don't believe the Inca's really had them.
Developing a written language is one of the hardest things a culture will ever do. We only know of 3 places where writing arose independently (china, mesopatamia, and mexico), everyone else either adapted someone elses method or stole the idea.
Actually it was the mayans and the aztecs who had the wheels on toys. However, they had no large animals to really make use of the carts. The Inca's had the large draft animals, but never made contact with the mexican cultures.
Well, I've seen aritcles in road and track where pro drivers were able to shave a few tenths of a second of their lap time by turning off the ASC, so obivously they were a little better than the system. But the average Joe is not Micheal Schumacher and has no business turning off the system (unless they're doing some sort of auto cross event).
But the time you make up in better manuvering would probably be made up by the fact that you're travelling slower. Plus, if you hit either the person coming at you, or some other obstical it sure would be better if you slowed to 25 MPH.
Only if they work properly, and never have "false positives". How many people have been killed by airbags? (Probably not as many as have been saved, but given the option, some of those who were killed may still be alive).
Many more people would be dead if airbags hadn't been introduced. Even those who would have opted out and been saved would be far offset by the number of deaths. And airbags today are wonderful, they inflate based on speed, severity of the impact, and weight of the occupant to minimize injuries.
Other than on gravel or snow I've never seen a single study that showed even highly skilled drivers could brake better without ABS. Now factor in the fact that with ABS you have much more control to steer the car while braking and there is no reason not to have ABS.
Yes I have. And if you step on the breaks in the snow it won't save you if you're in a curve. Yes, I do a good part of my driving in snow and I have ABS. Same thing as 4x4, if you go too fast you go off the road just the same. A tiny car is actually much easier to regain control of than a heavy SUV.
That all depends on how advanced your car is. I too drive in the snow. I have AWD and ABS. I also have a ASC system that will individually brake each wheel to keep me from skidding or spinning when cornerning. It works wonders. I would think that any system complex enough to do what this honda system does would also incorporate the current state of the art. Of course there is a switch on my dash that allows me to turn my system off as well, perhaps honda will do the same.
If there is a car withing 300ft of you, you better be hitting the brakes! at 60mph you're both travelling at 88 ft/s. So it would take all of 2s for you to collide.
So if there was a car coming head on at you, you simply would try to steer out of the way? You would also brake? In the even of a car coming head on, your best bet is to slow as fast as possible AND steer out of the way. If this system can start to do the braking before I realize something is wrong, it's doing a good job.
the article says it only engages at high speeds. 300ft is probably acceptable for anything over 60 MPH. Considering at 60 MPH the braking distance is probably around 130 ft (under full braking), and your car is travelling at 88 ft/s, 300 ft would be just about right. Also, 300 ft might be the limit out to which this is effective.
I'm thinking any car advanced enough to have this system would also have some sort of ASC (Advanced Stability Control) system as well. I have it in my Audi and it uses telemetry to indvidually brake each wheel variying amounts to avoide any skids during evasive action. The computer can do a much better job of controlling a skid than all but the best driver.
It is illegal in most (all?) countries to interfere with the driver and/or the car's controls. Why should techology -- with less sensory input and a poorer decision making ability -- be permitted to do this?
Where did you get this nonsense? ASC interferes with the drivers control. If I do something crazy and would spin my car it ignores my throttle information and makes corrections to save my stupid ass. If you drive a newer mercedes you have brakes that brake harder than you tell them to if it doesn't think you're doing a good enough job. Even antilock brakes themselves interfere with your control. The car has much more sensory control than I ever could. It nows how fast each wheel is spinning, the perciese amount of G's I'm generating, and can calculate what's going to happen 100's of times a second; not to mention respond almost instantly. The only thing that worries me about these systems is the fact that the auto makers tell you they are there. People tend to drive even stupider when there car is loaded up with saftey features.
Slashdot Mirror
it is a skinny puppy reference. At one time I may have been the largest skinny puppy fan on the planet. They still are my favorite band, but my tastes have shifted a little over the years.
I just designed a wooden shelf for holding LP's. It probably won't be as big as you'd need, but more could easily be attached. It will be made completly out of one sheet (4'x8') of MDF, although any wood would work. It calls for 3 shelves: 16" wide, 16" deep, and 22" high. The beauty of it is that I should be able to build it cheap, and if I need to expand can just hook an identical shelf next to it. I'm probably going to go with MDF, just because it can be painted to match the rest of my furniture.
wow... and I thought we were bad. My GF and I combined our collections and we only ended up with about 500 CD's and probably 100 LP's. Not to mention all the DVD's and video's. We had to buy a special media cabinet from IKEA that can be configured for about 900 CD's and for video's and DVD's. We still haven't found anything to replace the milk crates for the LP's though.
actually SACD and DVD-A weren't developed to battle illegal downloading. They do have protections built in to combat it, but they really are a ploy to get you to replace your entire music collection again. People have already replaced all their LPs with CDs, so it's time for a new format. I'm all for the new format, I really do think they add things to the mix; however, most of my cd's will probably never be re-released in the format and wouldn't benifit even if they were. I had been waiting to make the plunge until the format war ended, but with universal players now becoming cheap; it looks like the two formats will coexist for quite some time. I must say being a signals guy at heart that SACD seems a very elegant solution, too bad it's proprietary.
No one knows why the mayans and aztecs never improved on the wheel. An interesting study would be to see if cultures that did independently develop the wheel developed hand carts before they developed carts for draft animals.
You are using modern concepts. Think about the other writing systems that were around. Elaborte pictographs or cuniforms carved into clay tablets. How much more efficient are those than this system? To make paper you need specific kinds of natural resources, and I don't believe the Inca's really had them.
Developing a written language is one of the hardest things a culture will ever do. We only know of 3 places where writing arose independently (china, mesopatamia, and mexico), everyone else either adapted someone elses method or stole the idea.
Actually it was the mayans and the aztecs who had the wheels on toys. However, they had no large animals to really make use of the carts. The Inca's had the large draft animals, but never made contact with the mexican cultures.
No... I saw it on discovery or TLC. it was in a chrysler minivan if i remeber, although it wasn't chrysler that was developing it.
That's great if we keep the originals around. But what if there are no more originals?
actually, you're allergic to the saliva. Which builds up on the skin and hair.
The program I saw had the car driving on the streets of LA. It used a combination of telemetry, radar, and GPS to navigate.
Well, I've seen aritcles in road and track where pro drivers were able to shave a few tenths of a second of their lap time by turning off the ASC, so obivously they were a little better than the system. But the average Joe is not Micheal Schumacher and has no business turning off the system (unless they're doing some sort of auto cross event).
But the time you make up in better manuvering would probably be made up by the fact that you're travelling slower. Plus, if you hit either the person coming at you, or some other obstical it sure would be better if you slowed to 25 MPH.
Other than on gravel or snow I've never seen a single study that showed even highly skilled drivers could brake better without ABS. Now factor in the fact that with ABS you have much more control to steer the car while braking and there is no reason not to have ABS.
Not to sink your boat or anything, but statistacly speaking Trucks are about the least safe cars you can drive. They come in right behind SUVS.
I've actually seen cars with auto pilot. They're experimental, and I believe only worked at speeds up to 50MPH, but they did work.
If there is a car withing 300ft of you, you better be hitting the brakes! at 60mph you're both travelling at 88 ft/s. So it would take all of 2s for you to collide.
So if there was a car coming head on at you, you simply would try to steer out of the way? You would also brake? In the even of a car coming head on, your best bet is to slow as fast as possible AND steer out of the way. If this system can start to do the braking before I realize something is wrong, it's doing a good job.
the article says it only engages at high speeds. 300ft is probably acceptable for anything over 60 MPH. Considering at 60 MPH the braking distance is probably around 130 ft (under full braking), and your car is travelling at 88 ft/s, 300 ft would be just about right. Also, 300 ft might be the limit out to which this is effective.
You are completly wrong. PCI Express is completly backword compatible with PCI. RTFA.
But the beauty of the standard is that all your pci cards work in the pci express slots, so none of those manufacturers have to change anything.