I'm not so sure that's as significant as you state.
Powerplants of every kind take a certain amount of mass, and as they rotate they induce a certain amount of vibration. Electric motors over certain sizes or power levels are often isolated with their own shock-absorbing motor mounts, even if they're not much more than bushings or pillow-blocks. Even devices as lowly and underpowered as squirrel-cage fans in evap coolers and air handlers have bushings.
With an electric car, you're deciding between using gearing to achieve optimal engine RPM at every speed, or you're suffering when you're at lower speeds, getting suboptimal RPM and suboptimal power consumption. This precludes wheel-motors (and has the side benefit of preventing excessive unsprung weight) but means that the drivetrain now has to be located somewhere amongst the body/frame of the car, and has to use shafts to deliver the power. This means that there's still going to be vibration, there's still going to be force applied to motor mounts in the form of torque, and it means that any accessories deriving power off of the main motor will still have to handle having a part that moves (on the motor) and a part that doesn't move (on the body) to work. Otherwise one has to have an accessory motor (which may still be necessary anyway) and would have to drag along more mass.
This isn't anything about owners, this is about off-lease cars. Leases are for predictable durations, so remaining battery life should be easy enough to determine.
On top of that, electric cars don't need the sort of fluids monitoring and maintenance that can make lease cars with gas engines undesirable; there's no, "don't change the oil for 50,000 miles, change it right before turning it back in" crap.
Obviously regular wear items like interior parts, tires/suspension/alignment, and such will still be the same, but I'm used to driving cars up close to 200,000 miles anyway, so that's not such a big deal.
I've known plenty of former military people both in and out of IT work that had no interest in learning beyond the minimum. I think that you're projecting.
My admittedly anecdotal observation is that the ratios are about the same, being former-military does not give a boost.
You're not a very good sysadmin, you'd know that you'll never see "fixed!" becuase the reboot will terminate the rest of the command before it can run.
...the process from poking unusual commands at Apache or another web daemon to how that allows control of the box?
When I ran web servers I ran the daemons as unprivileged accounts that had no shell, and in a couple of instances there was chroot sandboxing to further help to mitigate penetration even if someone managed to exploit a vulnerability in the web daemon.
How is this working? Are people not folliowing good practices?
The guy was injured enough in combat that he receives 100% disability and does-so regardless of another job (ie, it won't be revoked if he starts working elsewhere) and he doesn't feel it's worth the effort. Had they made it easy to transition then he probably would have, but without it being simple he doesn't feel it's worthwhile, and with the disability check I don't really blame him. And with the PTSD it's probably an even easier decision.
It'll actually be for each according to what he can afford.
Carbon 'tax' will be imposed at transaction, not at use. That means that the purchase cost of fuel or of electricity, or of a good, will go up based on taxes at some point in either the supply or retail chain.
So, kind of like how it already is, some hobbies get more expensive, some get cheaper, some stay the same.
You clearly have zero experience with the military. We'd all appreciate it if you just kept quiet instead of using your outdated stereotypes and things you've seen in the movies.
I just call them as I see 'em, based on my experiences with about a dozen former-military coworkers. Half a dozen were worth their salt, half weren't. That was about the same ratio as everyone else.
A coworker's son was a medic embedded with a squad or something along those lines doing forward patrols in our current theatres of war, and he literally had to save lives while bullets were flying. He can't get a job as an EMT because the rules say that he's not qualified becuase his Army credentials don't translate into the civilian world.
Even if they do train you, that training might not be recognized or valued.
I don't think that this is necessarily correct, especially with the infusion of private contractors into specialized roles. Systems are delivered ready-to-use, and the military personnel are there to follow the book to keep them running, not to innovate. Military branches are generally conservative in nature because they must stick with what works. Theirs is not develop new doctrine, but to follow the existing doctrine until it's replaced for them.
For every former-military IT-pro that's a true expert in their field (of whom I've worked with a couple) there's a former-military IT-pro that was trained on one very specific system and cannot handle even basic common-knowledge tasks.
I worked with someone that was former-military that started on the helpdesk like most people in the organization, and workorders were created with descriptions like, "Computer does not start." This description meant everything from the computer wouldn't power on to the user couldn't remember their password to log-in.
I worked with someone else that was a communications cabling specialist that probably forgot more about cabling than I ever knew, and could deal with phones, copper ethernet, and fiber ethernet without batting an eye. So at least there's that.
Because FiatChrysler, through the merger of Fiat and Chrysler, through the acquisition of American Motors, through the acquisition of Kaiser-Jeep, through the acquisition by Kaiser, owns the name, not HP...
Unfortunately it's very likely if it were limited to just one, it wouldn't be SpaceX. As the new kid on the block they don't have enough elected officials in their pockets.
Machiavellian of me, but sometimes I wonder if this propping-up of Sierra Nevada is to help Boeing.
There was a rather amusing Star Trek: TNG episode, "The Price," where particularly obnoxious Ferengi were hired to disrupt the bidding process. In this real-life scenario Sierra Nevada hasn't demonstrated anything reaching the ISS while both SpaceX and Boeing (via the Shuttle at least) have, so there's proven vs. unproven in the launch vehicles, and SpaceX has proven that it can return a craft without burning it up, which is a nice healthy step toward man-rating it. Sierra Nevada, on the other hand, isn't close to that far along.
I believe the word as used is "Synergy", which is Orwellian double-speak for eliminating anything perceived as redundant in the now-merged company. This means layoffs usually, and things like technical support and customer service tend to be significantly reduced in the process. If Time Warner's customer service is functioning decently now, the formerly Time Warner customers will see a significant reduction in the quality of the customer service post-merger. Likewise, the already terrible customer service that Comcast customers face will be even worse as the helpdesk now has to learn how to deal with two systems, Comcast's and Time Warner's, and this will slow down call flow.
On top of that, as separate companies, one of them could decide to try to expand operations into the other's area, as competition. Granted that's more difficult with things like cables or fiber, but in my neck of the woods, the local phone company, the local cable company, AT&T, and probably a couple of other entities own fiber in the ground or on the poles, there's more opportunity for players in the market than just the phone company or just the cable company. People need to stop thinking in terms of just two players.
I donno about you, but I'm not an MSDN subscriber or someone that's beta-tested Microsoft software in any official capacity, so I have no expectation to learn of this anywhere except to, "read about it in a blog."
I guess we'll wait and see, like we always do, and I'm sure that some M$ fanboys will thoroughly go through the release version when it debuts to discover all of the hidden gems that didn't get removed, and they'll give us workarounds to remove or break them. As it has just about always been all of the way back to "Windows Chicago".
I'm thinking something like a contrarotating set of cylinders, inner and outer, with the inner being the habitat. On top of that, there would be a series of weights located on the inside cylinder that could be automatically shifted as the weight in the habitat moves around, to keep it in balance.
I've built engines, and while they are statically balanced, and do not change balance once set up, they can be either internally balanced, where the weight is added or removed from the crank as needed, or externally, where the vibration dampener and torque converter or flywheel have weight added to make them balance. I don't see why one couldn't do that dynamically if the system were properly set up.
Yeah, one has to balance the effects of 6+ months one-way in a small metal box while awake and possibly having conflicts with fellow astronauts and cabin fever that one can't even go out on-deck to mitigate versus people that don't wake up again.
I expect that years of studies, including Earth-orbiting studies will be conducted before we ever send people to Mars this way.
...convention centers, sports stadiums, and other large public venues that stop working simply due to the sheer number of people congregated, that would be nice.
I didn't say that he was bad, I said that he was overrated a bit. I enjoyed what I've read, and I read more than the original three, but when he started making attempts to merge Foundation with the Robot series, I didn't find that it worked as well as I had expected. If Asimov wasn't so incredibly hyped then maybe my expectations wouldn't have been so high to start with, contributing to my let-down.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not so sure that's as significant as you state.
Powerplants of every kind take a certain amount of mass, and as they rotate they induce a certain amount of vibration. Electric motors over certain sizes or power levels are often isolated with their own shock-absorbing motor mounts, even if they're not much more than bushings or pillow-blocks. Even devices as lowly and underpowered as squirrel-cage fans in evap coolers and air handlers have bushings.
With an electric car, you're deciding between using gearing to achieve optimal engine RPM at every speed, or you're suffering when you're at lower speeds, getting suboptimal RPM and suboptimal power consumption. This precludes wheel-motors (and has the side benefit of preventing excessive unsprung weight) but means that the drivetrain now has to be located somewhere amongst the body/frame of the car, and has to use shafts to deliver the power. This means that there's still going to be vibration, there's still going to be force applied to motor mounts in the form of torque, and it means that any accessories deriving power off of the main motor will still have to handle having a part that moves (on the motor) and a part that doesn't move (on the body) to work. Otherwise one has to have an accessory motor (which may still be necessary anyway) and would have to drag along more mass.
This isn't anything about owners, this is about off-lease cars. Leases are for predictable durations, so remaining battery life should be easy enough to determine.
On top of that, electric cars don't need the sort of fluids monitoring and maintenance that can make lease cars with gas engines undesirable; there's no, "don't change the oil for 50,000 miles, change it right before turning it back in" crap.
Obviously regular wear items like interior parts, tires/suspension/alignment, and such will still be the same, but I'm used to driving cars up close to 200,000 miles anyway, so that's not such a big deal.
I've known plenty of former military people both in and out of IT work that had no interest in learning beyond the minimum. I think that you're projecting.
My admittedly anecdotal observation is that the ratios are about the same, being former-military does not give a boost.
You're not a very good sysadmin, you'd know that you'll never see "fixed!" becuase the reboot will terminate the rest of the command before it can run.
...the process from poking unusual commands at Apache or another web daemon to how that allows control of the box?
When I ran web servers I ran the daemons as unprivileged accounts that had no shell, and in a couple of instances there was chroot sandboxing to further help to mitigate penetration even if someone managed to exploit a vulnerability in the web daemon.
How is this working? Are people not folliowing good practices?
Heh. Love the personal attack. Real classy.
The guy was injured enough in combat that he receives 100% disability and does-so regardless of another job (ie, it won't be revoked if he starts working elsewhere) and he doesn't feel it's worth the effort. Had they made it easy to transition then he probably would have, but without it being simple he doesn't feel it's worthwhile, and with the disability check I don't really blame him. And with the PTSD it's probably an even easier decision.
It'll actually be for each according to what he can afford.
Carbon 'tax' will be imposed at transaction, not at use. That means that the purchase cost of fuel or of electricity, or of a good, will go up based on taxes at some point in either the supply or retail chain.
So, kind of like how it already is, some hobbies get more expensive, some get cheaper, some stay the same.
I just call them as I see 'em, based on my experiences with about a dozen former-military coworkers. Half a dozen were worth their salt, half weren't. That was about the same ratio as everyone else.
A coworker's son was a medic embedded with a squad or something along those lines doing forward patrols in our current theatres of war, and he literally had to save lives while bullets were flying. He can't get a job as an EMT because the rules say that he's not qualified becuase his Army credentials don't translate into the civilian world.
Even if they do train you, that training might not be recognized or valued.
I don't think that this is necessarily correct, especially with the infusion of private contractors into specialized roles. Systems are delivered ready-to-use, and the military personnel are there to follow the book to keep them running, not to innovate. Military branches are generally conservative in nature because they must stick with what works. Theirs is not develop new doctrine, but to follow the existing doctrine until it's replaced for them.
On the other hand, bad former-military people were cogs in a machine, and don't see past their prescribed task at all.
I don't think that having been military or not really gives much of a sign of how one will work out.
For every former-military IT-pro that's a true expert in their field (of whom I've worked with a couple) there's a former-military IT-pro that was trained on one very specific system and cannot handle even basic common-knowledge tasks.
I worked with someone that was former-military that started on the helpdesk like most people in the organization, and workorders were created with descriptions like, "Computer does not start." This description meant everything from the computer wouldn't power on to the user couldn't remember their password to log-in.
I worked with someone else that was a communications cabling specialist that probably forgot more about cabling than I ever knew, and could deal with phones, copper ethernet, and fiber ethernet without batting an eye. So at least there's that.
Because FiatChrysler, through the merger of Fiat and Chrysler, through the acquisition of American Motors, through the acquisition of Kaiser-Jeep, through the acquisition by Kaiser, owns the name, not HP...
Unfortunately it's very likely if it were limited to just one, it wouldn't be SpaceX. As the new kid on the block they don't have enough elected officials in their pockets.
Machiavellian of me, but sometimes I wonder if this propping-up of Sierra Nevada is to help Boeing.
There was a rather amusing Star Trek: TNG episode, "The Price," where particularly obnoxious Ferengi were hired to disrupt the bidding process. In this real-life scenario Sierra Nevada hasn't demonstrated anything reaching the ISS while both SpaceX and Boeing (via the Shuttle at least) have, so there's proven vs. unproven in the launch vehicles, and SpaceX has proven that it can return a craft without burning it up, which is a nice healthy step toward man-rating it. Sierra Nevada, on the other hand, isn't close to that far along.
No, one will be Hewlett, the other, Packard.
I believe the word as used is "Synergy", which is Orwellian double-speak for eliminating anything perceived as redundant in the now-merged company. This means layoffs usually, and things like technical support and customer service tend to be significantly reduced in the process. If Time Warner's customer service is functioning decently now, the formerly Time Warner customers will see a significant reduction in the quality of the customer service post-merger. Likewise, the already terrible customer service that Comcast customers face will be even worse as the helpdesk now has to learn how to deal with two systems, Comcast's and Time Warner's, and this will slow down call flow.
On top of that, as separate companies, one of them could decide to try to expand operations into the other's area, as competition. Granted that's more difficult with things like cables or fiber, but in my neck of the woods, the local phone company, the local cable company, AT&T, and probably a couple of other entities own fiber in the ground or on the poles, there's more opportunity for players in the market than just the phone company or just the cable company. People need to stop thinking in terms of just two players.
I donno about you, but I'm not an MSDN subscriber or someone that's beta-tested Microsoft software in any official capacity, so I have no expectation to learn of this anywhere except to, "read about it in a blog."
I guess we'll wait and see, like we always do, and I'm sure that some M$ fanboys will thoroughly go through the release version when it debuts to discover all of the hidden gems that didn't get removed, and they'll give us workarounds to remove or break them. As it has just about always been all of the way back to "Windows Chicago".
I'm thinking something like a contrarotating set of cylinders, inner and outer, with the inner being the habitat. On top of that, there would be a series of weights located on the inside cylinder that could be automatically shifted as the weight in the habitat moves around, to keep it in balance.
I've built engines, and while they are statically balanced, and do not change balance once set up, they can be either internally balanced, where the weight is added or removed from the crank as needed, or externally, where the vibration dampener and torque converter or flywheel have weight added to make them balance. I don't see why one couldn't do that dynamically if the system were properly set up.
Oooh. Maybe they'll invent the Transporter next!
Yeah, one has to balance the effects of 6+ months one-way in a small metal box while awake and possibly having conflicts with fellow astronauts and cabin fever that one can't even go out on-deck to mitigate versus people that don't wake up again.
I expect that years of studies, including Earth-orbiting studies will be conducted before we ever send people to Mars this way.
Maybe it's time to actually design a ship with a centrifuge in it, so that a lot of the effects of microgravity are mitigated...
...convention centers, sports stadiums, and other large public venues that stop working simply due to the sheer number of people congregated, that would be nice.
I really wish that those that subscribed to noblesse oblige would remember the obligation part. If they did then I might give them some lattitude.
I didn't say that he was bad, I said that he was overrated a bit. I enjoyed what I've read, and I read more than the original three, but when he started making attempts to merge Foundation with the Robot series, I didn't find that it worked as well as I had expected. If Asimov wasn't so incredibly hyped then maybe my expectations wouldn't have been so high to start with, contributing to my let-down.