TCS doesn't have any effect without the engine powering, TCS applies brakes to wheels that may be slipping because they are over powered. No power to the wheels, no effect from TCS. it, power steering and brakes should continue to function if the car is in gear and moving at a speed greater than roughly 20mph or so depending on the automatic transmission, the torque converter will generally stay engaged, after which boost pumps powered by vacuum will still have the ability to stop the car and provide some steering assist. Moveing more than 15mph and steering is still fairly easy even without power assist. Manual transmissions will continue to be pretty much fully functional until stopped, and engine drag is pretty much the best ABS you can have.
Turning off the the engine does not mean turning off the entire electrical system, it means turning off the power to the electronics that allow the engine to run. ABS will continue to function.
On the other hand, putting your car in neutral loses all engine related drag, effectively removing some braking ability and will destroy the engine, fairly quickly if its stock WOT, even with a governor it won't last long without a load on it at WOT, at which point you're going to be unable to get it to reengage the torque converter if its an automatic transmission, so now you're truly good and fucked.
I'm not sure where you got your driving instructions from, but you should return them, they are stupid.
You can hand crank a 10hp motor, most people even a 15hp. You aren't hand cranking a 100hp motor in some cheapass econo box, and you certainly aren't crank anything in a normal car.
Your analogy is bunk because you don't actually understand the process of starting a car or how much energy is required.
You are physically incapable of manually starting any modern car without using some sort of storage method, maybe you could wind up a spring and let it release to start a car, but you're going to crank for an hour to store enough energy, your arm is going to feel like its falling off, and god forbid it doesn't fire on start.
... I could convert my fixed wing UAV to nitro and hit an hour of flight time, you can fly it in 'super simple mode' with a playstation controller and a laptop without any previous experience flying (I've tested this with multiple people who knew nothing about it in advance), I can get 4-5km range with off the shelf components and a directional tracking antenna.
GPS, IR and visible light camera on a stabilized mount, and able to be operated and handled by an infantrymen... all check, though I generally carry either IR or daylight cameras rather than both.
I only built one (singular) initially, but it cost a little less than $2k without optics. Admittedly, their camera is far superior to mine, they aren't using a $98,000 camera either.
You really have no idea how cheap and easily obtainable fully autonomous UAVs are. Scaling it up is proportional, not exponential or something silly.
automous navigation features cost you less than $500 for a fully working system controller including required accelerometers, gyros, GPS, compass and a short range telemetry system (only short range due to low output power). The flight controller doesn't have to be any different on a tiny little RC model all the way up to the the largest aircraft in service. The OSS software doesn't yet support orbiting but I suspect it will soon. The only hardware difference is the servos to drive the control surfaces and power output of the engines.
Oh, and its open source... and it probably does more than anything the UAVs you mention do as far as flight control.
If you want the cheap asian knock off, its less than $200 from hobby king.
UAV controllers are an essentially solved problem, its just refinement at this stage, and the hardware to do the actual flight management is dirty cheap.
Communications are also a solved problem, the hardware is available already and is available to anyone, though it requires a operator license... which doesn't come with the UAV, you have to get it yourself from the FCC.
Optics are a little tricker, but nothing to justify the cost of these systems unless you're ordering optics like used in the U-2 spy plane, which your drone isn't going to be capable of taking advantage of anyway. For anything other than what the NSA wants, a gimble to deal with pan/tilt/stabilization and vibration dampening isn't that expensive either, though gimble and camera are likely to be the most expensive bits if you want high quality but that may just be my misperception as thats the area I know least about. Low end stuff that works as well as anything you've actually seen footage from (i.e. not secret stuff) is less than 5k and it will shoot as good as most movie cameras... from thousands of feet up where you can't hear it at all.
$100k is a ridiculous price. The communications/control system is a freaking PC with a high power transmitter, nothing special.
In my state, there is no such thing as proprietary know-how. If you don't want someone taking their experience elsewhere, you pay them more, if you don't like that, you're in the wrong state. Of course, this state also has a habit of completely nullifying non-compete clauses that are ridiculous as well, for instance a non-compete clause that extends beyond the state boundaries will almost certainly be completely ignored by the courts. My former employer found out the hardware when they wrote my non-compete as a nation wide non-compete. The court didn't say it was limited to NC or local, it flat out nullified the whole non-compete and released me from my obligations to it across the board.
They don't take kindly on trying to turn someone into a slave, which is ironic considering I'm in 'the south'
Stealing code or any data is a different story, but if Carmack had some special experience in his brain that he took with him, Zenimax could go fuck themselves.
Note: My state is not involved in any of this, just throwing it out there.
The smaller lenses are actually easier and cheaper to grind to closer optical tolerances
While technically correct, you're utterly wrong from a practical perspective. Defects are far more noticeable on smaller lenses trying to do more in a smaller space. With the same tolerances, you'll have an inferior picture. You have to be MUCH MUCH more precise as the lens size shrinks, just maintaining the same tolerances will result in poorer performance.
A tiny ass cell phone sensor coupled with the fact that they have to stuff tiny lenses in a tiny as little space is never going to be able to compete with a larger sensor and optics that don't have to warp the light like a black hole to get it where it needs to be.
Counting cards is fairly simple to take away the house edge, if you can count without using your fingers, its easy. You get the best performance counting when you're there from the start of the shoe, but you don't have to wait for a reshuffle to increase your chances by counting.
Its simple hi/lo/zero.
There are extremely complex methods, but they offer no major advantage to using them, arguably none at all beyond the theory that they are better.
Just because you watched some TV special about the church group doesn't mean it has to be done in a group, See Donald Johnson who has taken more from the casinos as a single player than any group has.
Head dissipation and power draw are more limiting than space in the case. Physical space is not the issue, they could simply use different packaging and stuff far more silicon in the same 2.5" profile but it'd burn up. Moving that to a 3.5" form factor isn't enough additional surface area to dissipate a much larger thermal load so its just not worth it.
For a single user doing "stuff" though, a short-stroked hard drive is about 1/4 the price and well fast enough. And yes, i had a work machine (laptop) with SSD that i ditched and went back to a momentus XT hybrid due to lack of capacity.
You keep saying that, but that doesn't make it magically true.
So you had a laptop with an SSD too small for your working set and that makes SSDs bad? No. It makes you or whoever provisioned the machine incompetent. More likely you were using your work machine for shit you shouldn't have, so you were all pissy that your working set was larger than your storage space.
I'd be willing to be a months pay that my 2009 macbook pro with SSD will out perform whatever brand new laptop you want to buy with spinning iron.
The fact that you think 'short stroking' a drive is some sort of massive performance increase shows your ignorance. Its a negligible performance increase for sequential operations, it doesn't do jack shit for random IO, which is thousands of times more important for normal every day working operations.
just buy a spinning disk about 4+ times larger than you need and effectively short-stroke it.
Which offers you almost no noticeable performance advantage other than sequential reads/writes.
It's not SSD fast, but it is plenty fast enough for general use, was about a hundred bucks.
Its no where near as fast, its not only not in the same ball park, its not on the same hemisphere of the planet, the fact that you're even acting like its close enough means you've never actually used an SSD as your only drive, you wouldn't make such a stupid comparison if you had.
And I don't waste my time shuffling data around constantly due to lack of space on my SSD
Because you're doing it wrong.
but unfortunately the intel chipset can only use 30-60GB
What? Why would you have the chipset control your caching? Thats stupid, use an OS and file system that isn't retarded and is aware of the entire storage stack such as FreeBSD (with zfs) or OSX with its built in support for using an SSD for cache.
Well, yes and no. Yes, by default it enables a swap file. You can turn it off, given enough memory however, so that disk cache never puts pressure on the rest of the VM system, it will not use the swap file. This is true for every modern OS however, Windows, Linux or *BSD, all of which favor larger disk cache instead of keeping unused blocks in memory.
I have 2 SSDs in a ZFS mirror that more or less constantly rebuilds the FreeBSD ports tree. The reasons for doing so are silly and not important to this discussion. It may spend 2 or 3 hours a day idle, the rest of the time, its building ports on those SSDs, with sync=yes (meaning ALL writes are sync, no write caching so i can see the log leading up to a kernel panic I'm searching for). Its been doing this for over a year already.
It has never thrown so much as a checksum error.
So my anecdotal evidence beats your anecdotal evidence.
Doesn't every country have something they are retarded about? The USA have several it seems, but its not like others don't have something we look at and think... 'WTF is the big deal?!'
But how stupid are you to believe they are actually doing this based on a slashdot summary, of an article that speculates... based on the speculation of another article, based on the speculation in another article, based on the speculation of yet another article?
I'm not kidding, go read them, its literally speculation 4 or 5 levels deep with pretty much nothing but correlation to back it up, and the number of correlated items is so low that no one in their right mind would jump to that assumption.
So while, if true, its not legal... you really (nor I) have any fucking idea why they are doing it.
Arguably cable descramblers are praying on the poor.
Fireworks, tobacco and guns generally aren't, but they certainly can be dangerous if not handled properly and there are plenty of people in those businesses that are scumbags, so its not surprising any of them are being targeted.
I'd wager however, its not EVERYONE in those industries, probably more of the scumbag types.
Slashdot Mirror
Douglas Adams would claim prior art so long ago the patent expired.
TCS doesn't have any effect without the engine powering, TCS applies brakes to wheels that may be slipping because they are over powered. No power to the wheels, no effect from TCS. it, power steering and brakes should continue to function if the car is in gear and moving at a speed greater than roughly 20mph or so depending on the automatic transmission, the torque converter will generally stay engaged, after which boost pumps powered by vacuum will still have the ability to stop the car and provide some steering assist. Moveing more than 15mph and steering is still fairly easy even without power assist. Manual transmissions will continue to be pretty much fully functional until stopped, and engine drag is pretty much the best ABS you can have.
Turning off the the engine does not mean turning off the entire electrical system, it means turning off the power to the electronics that allow the engine to run. ABS will continue to function.
On the other hand, putting your car in neutral loses all engine related drag, effectively removing some braking ability and will destroy the engine, fairly quickly if its stock WOT, even with a governor it won't last long without a load on it at WOT, at which point you're going to be unable to get it to reengage the torque converter if its an automatic transmission, so now you're truly good and fucked.
I'm not sure where you got your driving instructions from, but you should return them, they are stupid.
So when your computer glitches ... and NONE of those subroutines function ... then what?
Do you believe in bug-less software?
You can hand crank a 10hp motor, most people even a 15hp. You aren't hand cranking a 100hp motor in some cheapass econo box, and you certainly aren't crank anything in a normal car.
Your analogy is bunk because you don't actually understand the process of starting a car or how much energy is required.
You are physically incapable of manually starting any modern car without using some sort of storage method, maybe you could wind up a spring and let it release to start a car, but you're going to crank for an hour to store enough energy, your arm is going to feel like its falling off, and god forbid it doesn't fire on start.
That applies ONLY to unsolicited mail ... i.e. spam. It does not apply to misdirected, mislabeled, or packages delivered to the wrong address.
I don't know how big things that USPS can handle are allowed to be, but size of the packages or weight may have something to do with it?
... I could convert my fixed wing UAV to nitro and hit an hour of flight time, you can fly it in 'super simple mode' with a playstation controller and a laptop without any previous experience flying (I've tested this with multiple people who knew nothing about it in advance), I can get 4-5km range with off the shelf components and a directional tracking antenna.
GPS, IR and visible light camera on a stabilized mount, and able to be operated and handled by an infantrymen ... all check, though I generally carry either IR or daylight cameras rather than both.
I only built one (singular) initially, but it cost a little less than $2k without optics. Admittedly, their camera is far superior to mine, they aren't using a $98,000 camera either.
You really have no idea how cheap and easily obtainable fully autonomous UAVs are. Scaling it up is proportional, not exponential or something silly.
automous navigation features cost you less than $500 for a fully working system controller including required accelerometers, gyros, GPS, compass and a short range telemetry system (only short range due to low output power). The flight controller doesn't have to be any different on a tiny little RC model all the way up to the the largest aircraft in service. The OSS software doesn't yet support orbiting but I suspect it will soon. The only hardware difference is the servos to drive the control surfaces and power output of the engines.
Oh, and its open source ... and it probably does more than anything the UAVs you mention do as far as flight control.
If you want the cheap asian knock off, its less than $200 from hobby king.
UAV controllers are an essentially solved problem, its just refinement at this stage, and the hardware to do the actual flight management is dirty cheap.
Communications are also a solved problem, the hardware is available already and is available to anyone, though it requires a operator license ... which doesn't come with the UAV, you have to get it yourself from the FCC.
Optics are a little tricker, but nothing to justify the cost of these systems unless you're ordering optics like used in the U-2 spy plane, which your drone isn't going to be capable of taking advantage of anyway. For anything other than what the NSA wants, a gimble to deal with pan/tilt/stabilization and vibration dampening isn't that expensive either, though gimble and camera are likely to be the most expensive bits if you want high quality but that may just be my misperception as thats the area I know least about. Low end stuff that works as well as anything you've actually seen footage from (i.e. not secret stuff) is less than 5k and it will shoot as good as most movie cameras ... from thousands of feet up where you can't hear it at all.
$100k is a ridiculous price. The communications/control system is a freaking PC with a high power transmitter, nothing special.
In my state, there is no such thing as proprietary know-how. If you don't want someone taking their experience elsewhere, you pay them more, if you don't like that, you're in the wrong state. Of course, this state also has a habit of completely nullifying non-compete clauses that are ridiculous as well, for instance a non-compete clause that extends beyond the state boundaries will almost certainly be completely ignored by the courts. My former employer found out the hardware when they wrote my non-compete as a nation wide non-compete. The court didn't say it was limited to NC or local, it flat out nullified the whole non-compete and released me from my obligations to it across the board.
They don't take kindly on trying to turn someone into a slave, which is ironic considering I'm in 'the south'
Stealing code or any data is a different story, but if Carmack had some special experience in his brain that he took with him, Zenimax could go fuck themselves.
Note: My state is not involved in any of this, just throwing it out there.
Its turtles all the way down mate.
The smaller lenses are actually easier and cheaper to grind to closer optical tolerances
While technically correct, you're utterly wrong from a practical perspective. Defects are far more noticeable on smaller lenses trying to do more in a smaller space. With the same tolerances, you'll have an inferior picture. You have to be MUCH MUCH more precise as the lens size shrinks, just maintaining the same tolerances will result in poorer performance.
That and sensor sensor sensor.
A tiny ass cell phone sensor coupled with the fact that they have to stuff tiny lenses in a tiny as little space is never going to be able to compete with a larger sensor and optics that don't have to warp the light like a black hole to get it where it needs to be.
Or ... read the article ... follow the link to the google maps overlay.
You fail as much as the GP.
http://www.blue-marble.de/nigh...
... No.
Counting cards is fairly simple to take away the house edge, if you can count without using your fingers, its easy. You get the best performance counting when you're there from the start of the shoe, but you don't have to wait for a reshuffle to increase your chances by counting.
Its simple hi/lo/zero.
There are extremely complex methods, but they offer no major advantage to using them, arguably none at all beyond the theory that they are better.
Just because you watched some TV special about the church group doesn't mean it has to be done in a group, See Donald Johnson who has taken more from the casinos as a single player than any group has.
Head dissipation and power draw are more limiting than space in the case. Physical space is not the issue, they could simply use different packaging and stuff far more silicon in the same 2.5" profile but it'd burn up. Moving that to a 3.5" form factor isn't enough additional surface area to dissipate a much larger thermal load so its just not worth it.
For a single user doing "stuff" though, a short-stroked hard drive is about 1/4 the price and well fast enough. And yes, i had a work machine (laptop) with SSD that i ditched and went back to a momentus XT hybrid due to lack of capacity.
You keep saying that, but that doesn't make it magically true.
So you had a laptop with an SSD too small for your working set and that makes SSDs bad? No. It makes you or whoever provisioned the machine incompetent. More likely you were using your work machine for shit you shouldn't have, so you were all pissy that your working set was larger than your storage space.
I'd be willing to be a months pay that my 2009 macbook pro with SSD will out perform whatever brand new laptop you want to buy with spinning iron.
The fact that you think 'short stroking' a drive is some sort of massive performance increase shows your ignorance. Its a negligible performance increase for sequential operations, it doesn't do jack shit for random IO, which is thousands of times more important for normal every day working operations.
Yes, it does, are you really so daft that you weren't aware of that and had to have someone on slashdot confirm it for you?
just buy a spinning disk about 4+ times larger than you need and effectively short-stroke it.
Which offers you almost no noticeable performance advantage other than sequential reads/writes.
It's not SSD fast, but it is plenty fast enough for general use, was about a hundred bucks.
Its no where near as fast, its not only not in the same ball park, its not on the same hemisphere of the planet, the fact that you're even acting like its close enough means you've never actually used an SSD as your only drive, you wouldn't make such a stupid comparison if you had.
And I don't waste my time shuffling data around constantly due to lack of space on my SSD
Because you're doing it wrong.
but unfortunately the intel chipset can only use 30-60GB
What? Why would you have the chipset control your caching? Thats stupid, use an OS and file system that isn't retarded and is aware of the entire storage stack such as FreeBSD (with zfs) or OSX with its built in support for using an SSD for cache.
IOPS stands for IO operations per seconds. Interrupts has nothing to do with it.
Well, yes and no. Yes, by default it enables a swap file. You can turn it off, given enough memory however, so that disk cache never puts pressure on the rest of the VM system, it will not use the swap file. This is true for every modern OS however, Windows, Linux or *BSD, all of which favor larger disk cache instead of keeping unused blocks in memory.
I have 2 SSDs in a ZFS mirror that more or less constantly rebuilds the FreeBSD ports tree. The reasons for doing so are silly and not important to this discussion. It may spend 2 or 3 hours a day idle, the rest of the time, its building ports on those SSDs, with sync=yes (meaning ALL writes are sync, no write caching so i can see the log leading up to a kernel panic I'm searching for). Its been doing this for over a year already.
It has never thrown so much as a checksum error.
So my anecdotal evidence beats your anecdotal evidence.
Or you could just acknowledge reality:
http://hardware.slashdot.org/s...
No
Doesn't every country have something they are retarded about? The USA have several it seems, but its not like others don't have something we look at and think ... 'WTF is the big deal?!'
Of course its not legal.
But how stupid are you to believe they are actually doing this based on a slashdot summary, of an article that speculates ... based on the speculation of another article, based on the speculation in another article, based on the speculation of yet another article?
I'm not kidding, go read them, its literally speculation 4 or 5 levels deep with pretty much nothing but correlation to back it up, and the number of correlated items is so low that no one in their right mind would jump to that assumption.
So while, if true, its not legal ... you really (nor I) have any fucking idea why they are doing it.
This is FUD, pure and simple.
Lets look at the industries that pray on poor people while we're at it:
Porn websites
Payday Loan services
Lottery
Credit Repair Services
Pyramid schemes
Arguably cable descramblers are praying on the poor.
Fireworks, tobacco and guns generally aren't, but they certainly can be dangerous if not handled properly and there are plenty of people in those businesses that are scumbags, so its not surprising any of them are being targeted.
I'd wager however, its not EVERYONE in those industries, probably more of the scumbag types.