Wartsila is a Finnish company. Hyundai licenses the engine technology and builds it on-site. Wartsila has also manufactures propellers in China and has recently announced a joint-venture engine factory agreemnent there.
Kinda puts a different spin on the whole thing, doesn't it?
Scratch a hunter and you'll uncover an environmentalist.
See, historically it's been hunters that have been the first to move to protect habitats and watersheds essential to wildlife. They see firsthand the consequences when these are lost. You can call it enlightened self interest, but it's really more than that. It's a drive to preserve the legacy of the outdoors, to keep things pristine and healthy for future generations to enjoy. That's the very thing that moved Teddy Roosevelt (and avid hunter and sportsman) to create the National Parks system.
Besides that, the whole ethos of skilled hunting isn't about achieving the kill. It is about respecting the animals one takes. That's a lot more than can be said about a minimum-wage slaughterhouse worker whacking cattle on the abattoir.
From a guy who's not shy about ripping up drywall, don't discount the spousal acceptance factor.
I remember sitting on my deck one night and overhearing this argument...
She (in an exasperated tone): "My life is HOLES in WALLS... " He (in a matter-of-fact 'WTF' tone): "Well, how else are these speakers going to get installed?"
Which brings up a point: wireless speakers are a huge win, so it's good they're becoming common now.
In the same vein, an easy-to-use wireless product that solves the "last 10 feet" problem to the display is very worthwhile. It would make mounting the panel on the wall (with a hidden AC outlet) a very attractive installation. Not only that, HDMI cabling is expensive (more than it should be) and not as easy to handle as, say, RG-6 or CAT-5.
But wireless (lightly-compressed) baseband YPbPr to the panel? Sure, it's a 'lingua franca' (like fax is to written communication) but I see several basic problems with this proposal.
First, an extra compress/decompress step can't be good for quality. Sure, much of the loss has already been taken in the first DCT/quant step, but stacked codecs never help. Second is interference. Using such light compression is a profligate use of the spectrum... using less of it though using the already-compressed source (and maybe applying more forward error correction) would be a better trade as it would be less susceptible to interference.
Given the modest cost of MPEG (and now H.264) HD decode, I wonder why TZero didn't consider an IPTV style approach first? As many have pointed out the source is already digital and encoded with very high quality (save for legacy TV, and that is well-served by low-cost codecs today.)
And, don't forget encryption too. I frankly would not like someone to snoop my UWB to view what I'm watching (though in my case a would-be snoop would get bored eventually: one can watch only so much Mythbusters...) That said, the lower the bit rate, the stronger you can make the cipher for a given compute power. You can use relatively robust AES or 3DES on compressed data while uncompressed data must make do with the much weaker HDCP (or something like it on JPEG2000.)
Finally, many sets will begin to sport PVR functions. It'd be nice to be able to stream that stuff back and forth between sets and boxes... a kind of decentralized storage if you will.
I'm liking 802.11n more for all this. And it's not encumbered with all that USB-centric weirdness.
The battery could possibly have been aftermarket, in which case they might have skimped on the thermal and voltage interlocks.
Some packs have "authentication" built in so that the host check to see if the battery is "official", that is, meets the OEM spec. As evil as this sounds, it is warranted in this case to prevent substandard packs being used.
My soon-to-be dismissed Motorola V710 (otherwise known as the Bluetooth-less wonder) also uses the volume buttons as call ignore when the phone is closed.
Now, where is that damn box Verizon is supposed to send me so I can shove that phone up their... settlement!
In the late 80's I remember seeing a piece in some truck/4x4 mag about this very thing and their result was the same: tailgate up meant less drag.
I remember this 'cause they also had top speed comparos of trucks... fastest small truck was a Jeep Commanche. Yes, I owned one of these (with the 4 liter, natch) and endured endless crap from by brother for driving a Rambler. But I still see these trucks soldiering on; they seem to run forever. S-10s, Rangers and Dakotas of that vintage, not so much.
But back to the topic... I suppose there's the whole tonneau cover / hard cover side question. Not to mention the camper shell debate (my own experience with this is that a shell cost me 2 mpg or so.)
Maybe in Seattle there's so damn many coffeehouses that there's not much loyalty? It's a competitive market, so it's not a surprise to me that there are callous people who take advantage of the wireless freebie. Or, maybe that's how Seattle people are. I don't know.
My own California experience with 802.11-enabled coffee places is very different: there does seem to be an ethic of supporting the establishment.
Yes, I've done four-hour sits at Coffee Critic in Ukiah, CA using their access for work stuff, but I also buy lots of coffee there too (and good coffee it is - they roast it on-premises) and did so without the wireless "loss leader". I've easily bought enough product in a year there to pay for the AP, if not the bandwidth.
... is an open search engine for *broadcast* content. Not a guide to stuff that's been ripped and recorded, but a truly free, open and platform-neutral electronic program guide.
Why? Because... it's time for Gemstar's cozy little patent-protected franchise to end. There's nothing sacred about aggregating TV schedules. They're like phone directories in that as simple compilations they can't be copyrighted.
HDCP can be applied to either DVI or HDCP. It is a standard on its own.
As a practical matter, DVI-capable HD set-tops that are hooked to a "pay" source have latent HDCP, or if they don't have HDCP they (rude surprise) downgrade the output of protected source to 480p. This was a needed compromise to prevent Hollywood from having a conniption over the raw uncompressed digital output.
Going forward, HDMI ready transmitters and receivers all include HDCP, even though it's not mandatory (but is strongly recommended) by the HDMI spec. For your trouble, you get a smaller connector and 8 channels of audio over the same skinny wire. HDMI is backwards and forwards compatable with DVI within the DTV range of picture formats.
But I wasn't sure about the rules for finding the good and bad. Others have mentioned the lack of URLs so that made it more difficult to inspect the links; that's what I generally do.
So without that info I had to improvise.
Anything that had no link (5) or a well-known link (1) I considered OK.
Anything that ran a CGI and had no independently verifiable info I considered suspect (2,4,7)
Anything that threatened to "nuke" an account and had a link I considered suspect (3,6,8)
(9) was tricky. However, since it didn't ask for information and was already personalized with information that could be verified independently (that is, ship-to, etc.) it seemed OK.
...is that humans have to feed and maintain them. And they cost money - industrial-strength slip printers are expensive.
But, printed paper reciepts are still the best, most tamper-resistant way to create a human-readable audit trail. They can be text so they can be read by humans or by OCR (works for checks, why not ballots?)
As I see it, the job of the touchscreen should be to provide a better UI to prevent mis-votes, period. Yes, it could count votes too, but only subject to audit - the paper ballot should still be considered authoritative.
Why? A number of reasons. One, the voting machines lack the physical security of the oft-compared ATM network, so they're vulnerable to tampering. Two, the systems and infrastructures in the roll-outs thus far seem to be "beta" quality. Three, their back-office systems aren't "hardened" against single-point failure well enough (the latest Florida fiasco being evidence of this point.) Four, the systems are proprietary and not subject to truly independent review.
In short, Diebold, Sequoia et. al. have shown that they are not ready for prime time. They don't "get" that the job their machines are being asked to perform has importance on par with, say, the Shuttle's flight control software.
The mistake the court made is that they expected the RIAA to be fair. Well, the RIAA schooled them on that.
Fact is, the RIAA is arguably the most consumer-hostile trade group today. This cynical move on their part cetainly proves it beyond all doubt.
So how to fix them?
The court should re-value the RIAA's "donation" at fair market value. Now here's the beauty: in this case, these CD titles are scrap, so they have negative value. They cost more to dispose of than they're worth.
So the RIAA owes libraries for tossing their (RIAA's) trash. I say fine RIAA that amount, and little extra to punish them for being asshats.
Now since RIAA cannot be trusted to secure and distribute titles of value for the libraries, simply take that job away from them. Impose a cash settlement from RIAA and let the libraries use those funds to acquire the titles themselves, from whomever they choose (including non-RIAA artists, out-of-prints, and so forth.)
I doubt the RIAA will learn any lesson given their track record of dogged hostility, but at least they could be forced in actually bringing about improvements in library media stocks.
MoQ (Pirsig) doesn't "deny" subjects and objects, it redefines them as values (Quality) and leaves Quality undefined (it defines everything else.)
There are always biases. Even if one were to able to completely set aside one's innate drive to interpret the senses, there are biases built into the senses themselves. For example our vision doesn't see infrared, yet important and useful information about the thing being seen (it's heat profile) is found there.
The difference between observing and hypothesizing is the overt attempt to apply a value-set to the phenomenon being seen. But that's the only difference.
Bias is everywhere... the trick to taming it is to allow dynamic things to challenge it.
They don't use forms for the walls as a rule. They dig the hole to shape, rebar the thing then blow shotcrete into it (Gunite is a tradename for a type of shotcrete that is mixed at the nozzle.) It's stiff enough that it's self-supporting.
Then they apply a bond coat, then plaster. Fill it with water and you're ready to swim (almost.)
Sometimes forms are used for features, such as slides, steps, vanishing edges and such. These are often made of Styrofoam and can be bought commercially. But mostly it's hand done.
I could see however where this kind of extrude-to-shape process could be applied to unusual high-end pools, especially if it had good dimensional control. But it's probably too pricey for the typical 20 x 30 kidney shape or rectangle pool that might cost about $30 - $40k to build, including labor and equipment.
And you still have to plumb and wire it correctly.
They do have one thing that helps (as it turns out, quite a bit): no in-band background noise to interfere with the communication.
Anyway, yes their data rates are lower than diect broadcast TV satellite. It's all about the relative S/N owing to inverse square law and the greater distance to the deep space vehicle. The rover and orbiter link rates are on par with Magellan's - 128~256 kb/s, compared with about 30mb/s for a DTV satellite transponder channel.
Read this chapter in JPL's Space Flight Primer for more information about how their space vehicle comms work. A tidbit I found in there: they use coherent (phase-locked) transmission and Doppler to very accurately measure the remote vehicle's position. That's a neat hack.
Both things are amazing when you look at them, for different reasons. Deep space communication is amazing because it's possible. Direct broadcast satellite is amazing because it's so cheap!
A nitpick: the 'milestone' stated in the article, which was apparently overlooked by many of the posters here is the fact that, for the first time, a non-NASA spacecraft (in this case the ESA's Mars Express Orbiter) got into the act as a data relay for the rovers. This is more a statement about cooperation than it is about outright technical achievement. It is a political milestone, much the same as our (America's) cooperation with Russia in the ISS and in developing new rocket booster technology. Yet while it is political, it is a good thing in that it's another step toward recognizing that for space exploration to be fully realized it needs to be global endeavor, not a national one.
This is very much at odds with Bush's election-year 'man to the moon' pipe dream that serves no real scientific end and is more about beating the collective American wiener on the table with China.
Re:Magnusson Moss Warranty Act
on
Hack Your Car
·
· Score: 1
Not entirely true *again* - cars (in the U.S. anyway) are tuned for emissions compliance first, reliability second. Performance and mileage come after that.
The main emissions issue is that catalytic convertors require a very specific and narrow range of operation to be able to achieve legal HC and NOx emissions. Too lean and NOx goes up; too rich and HC goes up. This range happens to be just rich of stoichemetric, so mileage and power tend to suffer.
Also, in the U.S. the manufacturer has to warrant the emissions system for 100,000 miles. This means that anything that causes premature failure becomes a liability.
Specific example: the new Mazda RX-8 makes nominally 250HP (some say even as high as 280, at least for the concept car) but by the time it made it here to the U.S. it was derated to 238HP. Why? Because the ECU had to be reprogrammed so the catalyst would last the 100,000 miles. The US-spec RX-8's mileage also suffered somewhat too. Bummer.
Now as to the example of the Viper vs. the RAM V10... this is a poor example. The RAM is a much heavier vehicle to begin with, and in V10 form is expected to tow what, like 10,000 lb or so? The application is much different, so in order to work efficiently (let alone survive) the RAM's version is of course going to be tuned to optimize torque (milder valve timing, different heads/manifold, etc.) vs. the Viper application. Secondarily, their ECU's would be different, but not for the reasons that you state. This is a good thing in my book.
Bottom line: US cars are far from optimally-tuned for mileage.
When it comes to CCD's, sometimes cold is a good thing: low temperatures reduce thermal noise. That why imagers used in astronomy often use cryogenic cooling units.
But, the imagers on the rovers don't have that performance requirement - they're doing terrestrial imaging in daylight.
As it turns out the rovers have internal heaters to keep the electronics at nominal temps, as well as aerogel insulation to reduce heat loss. So it's not really an issue.
There's more about the science imagers here and here (both PDF files.) Enjoy.
... because they offer more channels for less money and their encoding quality is (usually) better (my experience based on DISH Network; can't speak for DirecTV.) Satellite wins hands down in almost all categories: quality, value, programming choice, reliability, equipment choice and customer service.
Quality and value... satellite providers have more total bandwidth (about 2-4x) to work with than the typical hybrid fiber-coax cable plant. Being all digital they don't have to carry legacy analog channels. So, they have less need to compress heavily than the cable guys do and so can offer more channels at lower cost.
Programming... satellite offers more channels (especially DISH) than most cable MSO's for less money. Locals too in most markets, and HDTV which cable co's have been painfully slow to adopt.
Reliability... as much as the cable ads make of it, it's a total non-issue with satellite. It's amazingly robust. In the three years on DISH I had one (!) outage due to rain fade, and then only for about 30 seconds or so. Compare this to my experience with cable providers (in my case Charter, now Adelphia) who seem to have several outages a year: distribution amps blowing up, segments taken down for maintenance/upgrades, and so forth.
Equipment... the satellite providers seem to adopt new tech more quickly than the cable MSO's. They embrace newer media (like HDTV, PVR's, etc.) more enthusiastically than the cable heavyweights do. This has a lot to do with the business model: generally, they unbundle the box from the service (you own the box) so you have choice. Some perceive this as a drawback; however when you look at the poor quality of most cable boxes vs. their rental cost you can see you get a better shake from DirecTV or DISH.
Customer service... DISH is awesome, can't speak for DirecTV although I understand they've improved too. In my case DISH patiently worked with me to debug a complex HDTV setup using a 5200 IRD, HDTV modulator and a Mistubishi HD set. Another time they broke 'seamless integration' with a firmware upgrade, they fixed it in two days (!) after I reported it to them.
Now, the satellite drawbacks...
First, there's no 'analog only' option so you're always looking at MPEG-2 and thus have slower channel surfing (not to mention your TV's P-I-P is mostly useless.) I understand there are IRD's with two decoders now.
Second, satellite broadband is poor due to the up/down latency (c = 300,000 km/s, it's the law;-) and limited aggregate bandwidth.
Third, you do have to mount the antenna. Some quibble about this but it's not a big deal: installation and gear are free if you buy a package; it's a simple DIY project if you prefer to run your own.
Most users need only one dual-LNB antenna. DISH needs a second one aimed at 61.5 or 148 if you want some of the 'non-core' programming, such as their slate of international channels (including Al-Jazeera and World Link TV - gotta get your Karachi Kops somehow) and some of the HDTV feeds. If your locals aren't on the core sats (110 and 119) DISH will install the second antenna free.
Also, before you commit to satellite, you need to verify that you have a clean sight line to the bird(s.) DISH has a tool you can download to get your azimuth and elevation to each bird. For the continental US the core satellites are at 101, 110 and 119 deg. - generally due south for most people. You do need to mount the antenna(s) on something that doesn't move - a nearby tree won't do it. If you're unsure about any of this have an installer do a site survey for you prior to entering into a contract.
If these drawbacks aren't a concern for you... then your next choice is DirecTV or DISH.
Three things should dictate your choice: programming, equipment and service.
Programming... DirectTV has NFL Sunday Ticket, DISH does not. DISH has lots of international programming, DirecTV does not. Other than that their lineup is nearly identical, but... to
Slashdot Mirror
The Vantec enclosures (NexStar3) offer eSATA and USB and accept a 3.5" PATA drive. You can get them at Fry's, TigerDirect, NewEgg, etc.
;-)
They come with an eSATA-to-SATA (internal) adapter for your rear panel. They're pretty and shiny too
Wartsila is a Finnish company. Hyundai licenses the engine technology and builds it on-site. Wartsila has also manufactures propellers in China and has recently announced a joint-venture engine factory agreemnent there.
Kinda puts a different spin on the whole thing, doesn't it?
Scratch a hunter and you'll uncover an environmentalist.
See, historically it's been hunters that have been the first to move to protect habitats and watersheds essential to wildlife. They see firsthand the consequences when these are lost. You can call it enlightened self interest, but it's really more than that. It's a drive to preserve the legacy of the outdoors, to keep things pristine and healthy for future generations to enjoy. That's the very thing that moved Teddy Roosevelt (and avid hunter and sportsman) to create the National Parks system.
Besides that, the whole ethos of skilled hunting isn't about achieving the kill. It is about respecting the animals one takes. That's a lot more than can be said about a minimum-wage slaughterhouse worker whacking cattle on the abattoir.
... even a caveman can use it? (ducks)
From a guy who's not shy about ripping up drywall, don't discount the spousal acceptance factor.
I remember sitting on my deck one night and overhearing this argument...
She (in an exasperated tone): "My life is HOLES in WALLS... "
He (in a matter-of-fact 'WTF' tone): "Well, how else are these speakers going to get installed?"
Which brings up a point: wireless speakers are a huge win, so it's good they're becoming common now.
In the same vein, an easy-to-use wireless product that solves the "last 10 feet" problem to the display is very worthwhile. It would make mounting the panel on the wall (with a hidden AC outlet) a very attractive installation. Not only that, HDMI cabling is expensive (more than it should be) and not as easy to handle as, say, RG-6 or CAT-5.
But wireless (lightly-compressed) baseband YPbPr to the panel? Sure, it's a 'lingua franca' (like fax is to written communication) but I see several basic problems with this proposal.
First, an extra compress/decompress step can't be good for quality. Sure, much of the loss has already been taken in the first DCT/quant step, but stacked codecs never help. Second is interference. Using such light compression is a profligate use of the spectrum... using less of it though using the already-compressed source (and maybe applying more forward error correction) would be a better trade as it would be less susceptible to interference.
Given the modest cost of MPEG (and now H.264) HD decode, I wonder why TZero didn't consider an IPTV style approach first? As many have pointed out the source is already digital and encoded with very high quality (save for legacy TV, and that is well-served by low-cost codecs today.)
And, don't forget encryption too. I frankly would not like someone to snoop my UWB to view what I'm watching (though in my case a would-be snoop would get bored eventually: one can watch only so much Mythbusters...) That said, the lower the bit rate, the stronger you can make the cipher for a given compute power. You can use relatively robust AES or 3DES on compressed data while uncompressed data must make do with the much weaker HDCP (or something like it on JPEG2000.)
Finally, many sets will begin to sport PVR functions. It'd be nice to be able to stream that stuff back and forth between sets and boxes... a kind of decentralized storage if you will.
I'm liking 802.11n more for all this. And it's not encumbered with all that USB-centric weirdness.
The battery could possibly have been aftermarket, in which case they might have skimped on the thermal and voltage interlocks.
Some packs have "authentication" built in so that the host check to see if the battery is "official", that is, meets the OEM spec. As evil as this sounds, it is warranted in this case to prevent substandard packs being used.
My soon-to-be dismissed Motorola V710 (otherwise known as the Bluetooth-less wonder) also uses the volume buttons as call ignore when the phone is closed.
Now, where is that damn box Verizon is supposed to send me so I can shove that phone up their... settlement!
In the late 80's I remember seeing a piece in some truck/4x4 mag about this very thing and their result was the same: tailgate up meant less drag.
I remember this 'cause they also had top speed comparos of trucks... fastest small truck was a Jeep Commanche. Yes, I owned one of these (with the 4 liter, natch) and endured endless crap from by brother for driving a Rambler. But I still see these trucks soldiering on; they seem to run forever. S-10s, Rangers and Dakotas of that vintage, not so much.
But back to the topic... I suppose there's the whole tonneau cover / hard cover side question. Not to mention the camper shell debate (my own experience with this is that a shell cost me 2 mpg or so.)
Maybe in Seattle there's so damn many coffeehouses that there's not much loyalty? It's a competitive market, so it's not a surprise to me that there are callous people who take advantage of the wireless freebie. Or, maybe that's how Seattle people are. I don't know.
My own California experience with 802.11-enabled coffee places is very different: there does seem to be an ethic of supporting the establishment.
Yes, I've done four-hour sits at Coffee Critic in Ukiah, CA using their access for work stuff, but I also buy lots of coffee there too (and good coffee it is - they roast it on-premises) and did so without the wireless "loss leader". I've easily bought enough product in a year there to pay for the AP, if not the bandwidth.
... is an open search engine for *broadcast* content. Not a guide to stuff that's been ripped and recorded, but a truly free, open and platform-neutral electronic program guide.
... it's time for Gemstar's cozy little patent-protected franchise to end. There's nothing sacred about aggregating TV schedules. They're like phone directories in that as simple compilations they can't be copyrighted.
Yes, I mean a replacement for these bloodsucking leeches.
Why? Because
... besides eating and burrowing under the covers in one's bed.
(I'd wish they had tried this on my Roxy when she blew a disk a couple of years back.)
Make that "applied to either DVI or HDMI".
Sorry, but you are mistaken.
HDCP can be applied to either DVI or HDCP. It is a standard on its own.
As a practical matter, DVI-capable HD set-tops that are hooked to a "pay" source have latent HDCP, or if they don't have HDCP they (rude surprise) downgrade the output of protected source to 480p. This was a needed compromise to prevent Hollywood from having a conniption over the raw uncompressed digital output.
Going forward, HDMI ready transmitters and receivers all include HDCP, even though it's not mandatory (but is strongly recommended) by the HDMI spec. For your trouble, you get a smaller connector and 8 channels of audio over the same skinny wire. HDMI is backwards and forwards compatable with DVI within the DTV range of picture formats.
But I wasn't sure about the rules for finding the good and bad. Others have mentioned the lack of URLs so that made it more difficult to inspect the links; that's what I generally do.
So without that info I had to improvise.
Anything that had no link (5) or a well-known link (1) I considered OK.
Anything that ran a CGI and had no independently verifiable info I considered suspect (2,4,7)
Anything that threatened to "nuke" an account and had a link I considered suspect (3,6,8)
(9) was tricky. However, since it didn't ask for information and was already personalized with information that could be verified independently (that is, ship-to, etc.) it seemed OK.
(10) had a blind link and no personal info.
...is that humans have to feed and maintain them. And they cost money - industrial-strength slip printers are expensive.
But, printed paper reciepts are still the best, most tamper-resistant way to create a human-readable audit trail. They can be text so they can be read by humans or by OCR (works for checks, why not ballots?)
As I see it, the job of the touchscreen should be to provide a better UI to prevent mis-votes, period. Yes, it could count votes too, but only subject to audit - the paper ballot should still be considered authoritative.
Why? A number of reasons. One, the voting machines lack the physical security of the oft-compared ATM network, so they're vulnerable to tampering. Two, the systems and infrastructures in the roll-outs thus far seem to be "beta" quality. Three, their back-office systems aren't "hardened" against single-point failure well enough (the latest Florida fiasco being evidence of this point.) Four, the systems are proprietary and not subject to truly independent review.
In short, Diebold, Sequoia et. al. have shown that they are not ready for prime time. They don't "get" that the job their machines are being asked to perform has importance on par with, say, the Shuttle's flight control software.
So, paper redundancy is needed.
The mistake the court made is that they expected the RIAA to be fair. Well, the RIAA schooled them on that.
Fact is, the RIAA is arguably the most consumer-hostile trade group today. This cynical move on their part cetainly proves it beyond all doubt.
So how to fix them?
The court should re-value the RIAA's "donation" at fair market value. Now here's the beauty: in this case, these CD titles are scrap, so they have negative value. They cost more to dispose of than they're worth.
So the RIAA owes libraries for tossing their (RIAA's) trash. I say fine RIAA that amount, and little extra to punish them for being asshats.
Now since RIAA cannot be trusted to secure and distribute titles of value for the libraries, simply take that job away from them. Impose a cash settlement from RIAA and let the libraries use those funds to acquire the titles themselves, from whomever they choose (including non-RIAA artists, out-of-prints, and so forth.)
I doubt the RIAA will learn any lesson given their track record of dogged hostility, but at least they could be forced in actually bringing about improvements in library media stocks.
They used an automotive turbo, etc. It was the "jet car" episode.
As I recall it didn't generate very much thrust.
(didn't RTFA)
MoQ (Pirsig) doesn't "deny" subjects and objects, it redefines them as values (Quality) and leaves Quality undefined (it defines everything else.)
There are always biases. Even if one were to able to completely set aside one's innate drive to interpret the senses, there are biases built into the senses themselves. For example our vision doesn't see infrared, yet important and useful information about the thing being seen (it's heat profile) is found there.
The difference between observing and hypothesizing is the overt attempt to apply a value-set to the phenomenon being seen. But that's the only difference.
Bias is everywhere... the trick to taming it is to allow dynamic things to challenge it.
That subject-object metaphysics will bite you in the ass every time.
(By the way, a hint: there is nothing but values.)
This moment of Quality brought to you by Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.
They don't use forms for the walls as a rule. They dig the hole to shape, rebar the thing then blow shotcrete into it (Gunite is a tradename for a type of shotcrete that is mixed at the nozzle.) It's stiff enough that it's self-supporting.
Then they apply a bond coat, then plaster. Fill it with water and you're ready to swim (almost.)
Sometimes forms are used for features, such as slides, steps, vanishing edges and such. These are often made of Styrofoam and can be bought commercially. But mostly it's hand done.
I could see however where this kind of extrude-to-shape process could be applied to unusual high-end pools, especially if it had good dimensional control. But it's probably too pricey for the typical 20 x 30 kidney shape or rectangle pool that might cost about $30 - $40k to build, including labor and equipment.
And you still have to plumb and wire it correctly.
Wanna know more about pools? Go to National Spa and Pool Institute.
They do have one thing that helps (as it turns out, quite a bit): no in-band background noise to interfere with the communication.
Anyway, yes their data rates are lower than diect broadcast TV satellite. It's all about the relative S/N owing to inverse square law and the greater distance to the deep space vehicle. The rover and orbiter link rates are on par with Magellan's - 128~256 kb/s, compared with about 30mb/s for a DTV satellite transponder channel.
Read this chapter in JPL's Space Flight Primer for more information about how their space vehicle comms work. A tidbit I found in there: they use coherent (phase-locked) transmission and Doppler to very accurately measure the remote vehicle's position. That's a neat hack.
Both things are amazing when you look at them, for different reasons. Deep space communication is amazing because it's possible. Direct broadcast satellite is amazing because it's so cheap!
A nitpick: the 'milestone' stated in the article, which was apparently overlooked by many of the posters here is the fact that, for the first time, a non-NASA spacecraft (in this case the ESA's Mars Express Orbiter) got into the act as a data relay for the rovers. This is more a statement about cooperation than it is about outright technical achievement. It is a political milestone, much the same as our (America's) cooperation with Russia in the ISS and in developing new rocket booster technology. Yet while it is political, it is a good thing in that it's another step toward recognizing that for space exploration to be fully realized it needs to be global endeavor, not a national one.
This is very much at odds with Bush's election-year 'man to the moon' pipe dream that serves no real scientific end and is more about beating the collective American wiener on the table with China.
Not entirely true *again* - cars (in the U.S. anyway) are tuned for emissions compliance first, reliability second. Performance and mileage come after that.
The main emissions issue is that catalytic convertors require a very specific and narrow range of operation to be able to achieve legal HC and NOx emissions. Too lean and NOx goes up; too rich and HC goes up. This range happens to be just rich of stoichemetric, so mileage and power tend to suffer.
Also, in the U.S. the manufacturer has to warrant the emissions system for 100,000 miles. This means that anything that causes premature failure becomes a liability.
Specific example: the new Mazda RX-8 makes nominally 250HP (some say even as high as 280, at least for the concept car) but by the time it made it here to the U.S. it was derated to 238HP. Why? Because the ECU had to be reprogrammed so the catalyst would last the 100,000 miles. The US-spec RX-8's mileage also suffered somewhat too. Bummer.
Now as to the example of the Viper vs. the RAM V10... this is a poor example. The RAM is a much heavier vehicle to begin with, and in V10 form is expected to tow what, like 10,000 lb or so? The application is much different, so in order to work efficiently (let alone survive) the RAM's version is of course going to be tuned to optimize torque (milder valve timing, different heads/manifold, etc.) vs. the Viper application. Secondarily, their ECU's would be different, but not for the reasons that you state. This is a good thing in my book.
Bottom line: US cars are far from optimally-tuned for mileage.
When it comes to CCD's, sometimes cold is a good thing: low temperatures reduce thermal noise. That why imagers used in astronomy often use cryogenic cooling units.
But, the imagers on the rovers don't have that performance requirement - they're doing terrestrial imaging in daylight.
As it turns out the rovers have internal heaters to keep the electronics at nominal temps, as well as aerogel insulation to reduce heat loss. So it's not really an issue.
There's more about the science imagers here and here (both PDF files.) Enjoy.
You sure went to an awful amount of trouble to miss the AC poster's point, dude.
... because they offer more channels for less money and their encoding quality is (usually) better (my experience based on DISH Network; can't speak for DirecTV.) Satellite wins hands down in almost all categories: quality, value, programming choice, reliability, equipment choice and customer service.
... satellite offers more channels (especially DISH) than most cable MSO's for less money. Locals too in most markets, and HDTV which cable co's have been painfully slow to adopt.
;-) and limited aggregate bandwidth.
Quality and value... satellite providers have more total bandwidth (about 2-4x) to work with than the typical hybrid fiber-coax cable plant. Being all digital they don't have to carry legacy analog channels. So, they have less need to compress heavily than the cable guys do and so can offer more channels at lower cost.
Programming
Reliability... as much as the cable ads make of it, it's a total non-issue with satellite. It's amazingly robust. In the three years on DISH I had one (!) outage due to rain fade, and then only for about 30 seconds or so. Compare this to my experience with cable providers (in my case Charter, now Adelphia) who seem to have several outages a year: distribution amps blowing up, segments taken down for maintenance/upgrades, and so forth.
Equipment... the satellite providers seem to adopt new tech more quickly than the cable MSO's. They embrace newer media (like HDTV, PVR's, etc.) more enthusiastically than the cable heavyweights do. This has a lot to do with the business model: generally, they unbundle the box from the service (you own the box) so you have choice. Some perceive this as a drawback; however when you look at the poor quality of most cable boxes vs. their rental cost you can see you get a better shake from DirecTV or DISH.
Customer service... DISH is awesome, can't speak for DirecTV although I understand they've improved too. In my case DISH patiently worked with me to debug a complex HDTV setup using a 5200 IRD, HDTV modulator and a Mistubishi HD set. Another time they broke 'seamless integration' with a firmware upgrade, they fixed it in two days (!) after I reported it to them.
Now, the satellite drawbacks...
First, there's no 'analog only' option so you're always looking at MPEG-2 and thus have slower channel surfing (not to mention your TV's P-I-P is mostly useless.) I understand there are IRD's with two decoders now.
Second, satellite broadband is poor due to the up/down latency (c = 300,000 km/s, it's the law
Third, you do have to mount the antenna. Some quibble about this but it's not a big deal: installation and gear are free if you buy a package; it's a simple DIY project if you prefer to run your own.
Most users need only one dual-LNB antenna. DISH needs a second one aimed at 61.5 or 148 if you want some of the 'non-core' programming, such as their slate of international channels (including Al-Jazeera and World Link TV - gotta get your Karachi Kops somehow) and some of the HDTV feeds. If your locals aren't on the core sats (110 and 119) DISH will install the second antenna free.
Also, before you commit to satellite, you need to verify that you have a clean sight line to the bird(s.) DISH has a tool you can download to get your azimuth and elevation to each bird. For the continental US the core satellites are at 101, 110 and 119 deg. - generally due south for most people. You do need to mount the antenna(s) on something that doesn't move - a nearby tree won't do it. If you're unsure about any of this have an installer do a site survey for you prior to entering into a contract.
If these drawbacks aren't a concern for you... then your next choice is DirecTV or DISH.
Three things should dictate your choice: programming, equipment and service.
Programming... DirectTV has NFL Sunday Ticket, DISH does not. DISH has lots of international programming, DirecTV does not. Other than that their lineup is nearly identical, but... to