Most likely it "kills" engine power by reducing it to idle or severely retarding spark timing, not completely cutting it, as that would be dangerous for the engine to completely stop as it would effectively lock the drivetrain.
So the PS would continue running, and actually power brakes are going to work better if the throttle plate closes (more vacuum to work with).
Actually, I find it believable, IF you include the navigation/entertainment system and the OS that the nav software runs on top of. (Typically WinCE).
However, the nav/entertainment system is pretty well decoupled from the ECU... Which these days might now be up to 128k flash... MAYBE. That's for a ROM with some pretty fancy matrix-style LUTs to optimize spark timing and fuel injector PWMs for all load/throttle conditions, including sophisticated ionization current sensing techniques.
There is one point where using brake and throttle at the same time does make sense - after going through moderately deep water of some sort (big puddle that splashes onto your brake drums/rotors), light brake application along with throttle can help dry the brakes MUCH faster and avoid a problem with the brakes when you really need them.
My background is as an RF engineer, and I have a reasonable familiarity with EMI engineering.
The utter fucking cluelessness of that article scares me.
"Professor Liu, the story says, compares it to the problem with the jamming of signals on military aircraft.
"The problem is, the expertise for preventing signal jamming rests in the Department of Defense, not the automakers or their suppliers,' Professor Liu says. " There's a MASSIVE difference between trying to prevent jamming of communications/radar signals, and basic EMI protection engineering of wired electronic circuits. There is PLENTY of experience with the latter in the civilian world, especially within the automotive industry.
Yes, cell phones can cause EMI problems with unshielded equipment, especially GSM phones. The critical systems in a vehicle are without any doubt *shielded*. More details on that later...
Satellite radios are RECEIVERS. (With the exception of satphones - these are incredibly rare.) They can be jammed, but you have to SERIOUSLY fuck up for one of them to interfere with something else. Same for GPS receivers. The most likely way for either of these systems to affect a car negatively is for them to short out and pull excessive current from their power supply. That's what fuses are for.
Large restaurant microwaves are subject to the same restrictions from the FCC as home microwaves. Yeah they can leak a little and they'll jam 2.4 GHz communications, but you could most likely take the magnetron from a microwave oven, point it at a car, and no adverse effects to critical systems would happen.
Why? Because the ignition system within a car is typically the #1 source of interference to anything in or near a car. A malfunctioning ignition system (old spark plug wires, loose spark plug wire connections) is tantamount to a high power spark gap transmitter. Automotive engineers have been dealing with internally generated EMI since the beginning of their industry.
Even in the most modern car, I find this hard to believe, unless you include the entertainment/nav system in the count.
In my opinion, it doesn't count since this is typically decoupled heavily from the safety-critical components of the car.
It is usually easier to write bug-free microcontroller code (ECUs and such) than general purpose PC code. Also, the distributed nature of most automotive microcontroller code keeps code separated into nice little easily-testable modules.
There are always exceptions, but it's very rare for a firmware update in a vehicle to cause regressions. Nearly all of the time, "bugs" in vehicular firmware are really unanticipated results of intentional design choices. For example, the Partial EMCC (PEMCC) code in early-1990s Chrysler A604 transmission firmware that slowly trashed torque converters was intended to improve fuel economy by partially engaging the torque converter lockup clutch - it turned out this wore out the clutch FAR faster than any of the mechanical engineers anticipated. In 1993 or so, this feature was removed once its contribution to premature transmission wear was discovered. (So yeah, this was a case where a bug really WAS originally a feature!)
"I try to explain to him he would be better off just buying a phone directly and not getting locked into a contract but he won't hear it."
If he is planning on staying with Verizon for two more year anyway, then how is he better off? I don't know of any provider that gives "bring your own phone" discounts, so if you are going to be with the company for two years, why not get the subsidy on the phone? Otherwise, you are paying a few hundred dollars extra for the phone and still paying the same price for service, only gaining a small amount of freedom that is irrelevant if your plan is to stay with the company for two years anyway.
"and probably 4 out of 5 times, fast-forwarding or rewinding will desync the audio" Sorry to say it, but an HD TiVo might not improve anything there.
Why? Because just like the TW box, the HD TiVos directly record the digital transport stream rather than encode the analog video signal in realtime. The streams themselves are broken from TW, not the playback/recording device. (Some worse than others - TWC's re-feed of CBS in my area is AWFUL. I have to perform a lossless transcode of every CBS recording in MythTV to fix CBS streams. Other channels are fine to play back even with direct recording.)
" An example of a juicy tidbit he revealed is that managers of a Latvian bank did not take the salary cuts they promised they would after the government bailed them out of economic trouble."
Are you sure he's actually talking about Latvia and not the US?
Oh wait, AIG's execs had the balls to promise nothing and actually give themselves *bonuses* for running their company so far into the ground that it needed a bailout.
DAoC did pretty well. There were specific areas reserved for PvP (kind of like BGs), except that they were VERY large areas with widespread objectives. To achieve some objectives would require a many-hour cooperative campaign involving many players (frequently 100-200+) from each realm.
Relic raids in DAoC could easily start out in early morning and constantly pick up in pace all day, usually taking 2-3 hours of escalation before anyone even declared "Call to arms, this looks like a relic raid in progress!"
One of the keys to the success of DAoC in that regard was the fact that on normal servers, certain areas were specifically geared towards RvR, and other areas were specifically set aside as PvE only for leveling/gearing.
Also, it was specifically set up that gear gained in PvE (exception: Catacombs expansion) would help you with RvR (to some degree to the dismay of hardcore RvRers, which is why Mythic eventually added more ways to purchase things with BPs and RPs.)
It's not like WoW where you have the PvE path and the PvP path and the rewards and required gear are almost mutually exclusive.
Aion has a lot of the best elements of DAoC, the main problem is that it is VERY grind-intensive and makes it difficult to reach the endgame, while DAoC's design focused primarily on life past 50 (exception: Catacombs again).
Yeah, it was my understanding that the Android app store was more locked down than the typical method of distribution for WM phones.
Yes, a warning pops up when something is unsigned. What's nice is that Windows Mobile will REMEMBER your decision and not ask you again unless it detects that the executable file has changed. Just enough protection (This app is unsigned, are you sure you want to install it?) without being annoying ("The Gmail Java applet is unsigned. Are you sure you want to connect to the Internet? This may result in data charges." over and over again - I HAVE AN UNLIMITED DATA PLAN, STOP ASKING ME ON EVERY URL REQUEST DAMMIT!")
This is false. Using a physics-based approach (relying on the fact that many natural processes are truly random), one can generate random numbers by sampling natural processes.
Common approaches include measurement of Zener diode noise, ring oscillator drift.
Less common approaches include taking a picture of a lava lamp and hashing the pixel values using SHA.
Intel had one based on drift between two ring buffer oscillators, one of which was perturbed by a noise source (Zener I think?). They ran at significantly different frequencies (one around 100x the other), and the slow oscillator was used to sample the state of the fast one. This resulted in a reasonably random series of bits. Additional methods (read literature on HWRNG design) were used to de-bias the results even further.
This HWRNG was built into quite a few of their chipsets, I think it was around the Pentium III days. For whatever reason this capability was removed in newer chipsets.
Yup, the need for true random numbers in crypto is when choosing a key - if the key generation isn't truly random, it's possible to predict.
If I recall correctly, this is what happened with the OpenSSL fiasco - someone broke one of the entropy sources in the key generation mechanism.
There are plenty of processes in nature that lead to true randomness - Zener diodes in reverse bias are notoriously noisy, this is usually a problem, but people have used that flaw to create hardware RNGs. Intel had a true hardware RNG based on measuring the drift between two ring oscillators, one of which was perturbed by a noise source, in some of their older chipsets. In fact that approach sounds a LOT like this "new" "flip-flop" based approach.
Some consumer crypto approaches (IIRC TrueCrypt uses this approach) rely on some degree of randomness in human keystroke intervals that can be de-biased and then used as a seed for a pseudorandom number generator.
In that configuration, the shields do not carry current, and ideally should be tied together. Only the center conductors carry current.
Performance-wise it would be very similar to shielded twisted pair, except that the construction of STP pretty much guarantees that the two conductors in the pair are of equal length - MUCH harder with the "two coaxial cables" approach.
As I mentioned in another post, this method is actually the reccommended method for performing 802.3 compliance verification using LeCroy serial data analyzers (such as the SDA9000) and their Ethernet test fixture. Each wire into the pair is wired to 50 ohm microstripline on a breakout board, which goes to a 50 ohm SMA connector. SMA-to-BNC coax cables go to two inputs of the SDA, and the unit does trace math to analyze the differential signal.
"That's exactly what happened in my school system. When I was a senior in high school (I couldn't graduate early because of the required 16 quarters of gym class per state law in NJ)"
I grew up in NJ and had a similar problem. I was lucky and discovered the Rutgers High School Scholars program, which was specifically designed to allow high schoolers to take a few classes per semester at Rutgers.
If I had not been in the Rutgers HSS program, I would have HATED my senior year in high school, since in addition to the three classes I was taking (Gym was required, Language and Literature aka English was required for any student attending school, and Wind Ensemble because I actually wanted to take it), I would have had to fill my high school schedule with classes I had no interest in taking. Instead, thanks to HSS, I was able to get an exemption to my high school's minimum courseload requirements.
In some ways I'm glad things worked out that way and I didn't graduate early, the "part high school part college" year of transition period helped a lot in terms of developing maturity without feeling like the system was holding me back. In addition this meant starting college at 18 (It sucked to be the one 17 year old on the bus when we went on a marching band roadtrip to Canada my freshman year), and getting to turn 21 in October of my junior year of college instead of senior year.:)
I think it would be a far better approach than what is proposed to continue targeting an age of aproximately 18 for high school graduation, but providing more opportunities for gifted high school students to enrich themselves. We do have this to some degree with programs such as the Rutgers program I attended and magnet schools, but they're rare and far too much of a pain in the ass to participate in thanks to the "everyone's a winner" mentality that No Child Left Behind put into law.
Coax provides far better frequency response than UTP.
Coax also has LOWER impedance than Cat5 - typically 50 or 75 ohms, as opposed to 100 for Cat5.
However, because Cat5 is a set of balanced transmission lines and coax is unbalanced, it still won't work unless you use two 50 ohm coax lines of exactly equal length per pair. Most coax in homes is 75 ohm coax.
Coax in MOST homes is 75 ohms, as that's what cable TV and TV antennas standardized on. (Partly because it was a 4:1 ratio to 300 ohm twinlead.)
Coax for most other radio systems NOT TV-related is 50 ohms. You can actually use two 50 ohm unbalanced cables of equal length to form a 100 ohm balanced transmission line.
Nope, one coax cable != one twisted pair, for the reasons you stated. Twisted pair is balanced, coax is unbalanced. Also, usually TP is 100-110 ohm impedance, coax is 50 or 75.
However, if you wire it properly and keep lengths VERY well controlled, two unbalanced 50 ohm lengths of coax of the same length can be used to form a balanced 100 ohm transmission line. One wire to the center of Coax A, one to the center of Coax B, tie the shields together.
This is, in fact, how the Ethernet breakout/test fixture for some LeCroy serial data analyzers works. The LeCroy has 50 ohm BNC inputs, each of which go to an SMA on the test fixture. Two adjacent BNCs go to the two wires of a pair on the Cat5.
This thread is talking about using the existing coax runs to wirepull Cat5 through the walls, not trying to run signals through the coax.
In theory, one could use four 50 ohm coax cables to run 100BaseT - Two 50 ohm single-ended coax cables can be used to form a 100 ohm differential connection, same characteristic impedance as Cat5 but with a hell of a lot more shielding and isolation.
However, if they were 75 ohm TV connections, they're useless as anything other than a physical cable to attach another cable to for the purposes of pulling it through the wall.
This doesn't make sense. Buzz didn't retroactively apply to linked content. I know Buzz autolinked a bunch of my associated content sources, but when I logged in, I had a "clean" Buzz slate.
Re:Does anybody know what EXACTLY was leaked?
on
Two Scoops of Buzz
·
· Score: 1
The only thing I can think of is that MAYBE Buzz would start auto-updating before you first logged into it?
It didn't retroactively update from any of the autolinked sources for me, I know that. Buzz did autolink to some content sources, but despite that (although it could have been lack of updates from said sources), when I first logged in I had no outgoing "buzzes". Thus it didn't matter that a bunch of people were autofollowing me and I was following them.
Problem was that the invites came out too slowly. People would often get an invite and have one friend that used it, while the rest of their friends didn't.
They'd stop using it, and then their friends would join it without even knowing they were a user. I know I haven't logged into Wave in ages because no one I knew used it, and it didn't autoleverage my existing Google social networks like Buzz does.
Slashdot Mirror
Most likely it "kills" engine power by reducing it to idle or severely retarding spark timing, not completely cutting it, as that would be dangerous for the engine to completely stop as it would effectively lock the drivetrain.
So the PS would continue running, and actually power brakes are going to work better if the throttle plate closes (more vacuum to work with).
Actually, I find it believable, IF you include the navigation/entertainment system and the OS that the nav software runs on top of. (Typically WinCE).
However, the nav/entertainment system is pretty well decoupled from the ECU... Which these days might now be up to 128k flash... MAYBE. That's for a ROM with some pretty fancy matrix-style LUTs to optimize spark timing and fuel injector PWMs for all load/throttle conditions, including sophisticated ionization current sensing techniques.
There is one point where using brake and throttle at the same time does make sense - after going through moderately deep water of some sort (big puddle that splashes onto your brake drums/rotors), light brake application along with throttle can help dry the brakes MUCH faster and avoid a problem with the brakes when you really need them.
My background is as an RF engineer, and I have a reasonable familiarity with EMI engineering.
The utter fucking cluelessness of that article scares me.
"Professor Liu, the story says, compares it to the problem with the jamming of signals on military aircraft.
"The problem is, the expertise for preventing signal jamming rests in the Department of Defense, not the automakers or their suppliers,' Professor Liu says. "
There's a MASSIVE difference between trying to prevent jamming of communications/radar signals, and basic EMI protection engineering of wired electronic circuits. There is PLENTY of experience with the latter in the civilian world, especially within the automotive industry.
Yes, cell phones can cause EMI problems with unshielded equipment, especially GSM phones. The critical systems in a vehicle are without any doubt *shielded*. More details on that later...
Satellite radios are RECEIVERS. (With the exception of satphones - these are incredibly rare.) They can be jammed, but you have to SERIOUSLY fuck up for one of them to interfere with something else. Same for GPS receivers. The most likely way for either of these systems to affect a car negatively is for them to short out and pull excessive current from their power supply. That's what fuses are for.
Large restaurant microwaves are subject to the same restrictions from the FCC as home microwaves. Yeah they can leak a little and they'll jam 2.4 GHz communications, but you could most likely take the magnetron from a microwave oven, point it at a car, and no adverse effects to critical systems would happen.
Why? Because the ignition system within a car is typically the #1 source of interference to anything in or near a car. A malfunctioning ignition system (old spark plug wires, loose spark plug wire connections) is tantamount to a high power spark gap transmitter. Automotive engineers have been dealing with internally generated EMI since the beginning of their industry.
Even in the most modern car, I find this hard to believe, unless you include the entertainment/nav system in the count.
In my opinion, it doesn't count since this is typically decoupled heavily from the safety-critical components of the car.
It is usually easier to write bug-free microcontroller code (ECUs and such) than general purpose PC code. Also, the distributed nature of most automotive microcontroller code keeps code separated into nice little easily-testable modules.
There are always exceptions, but it's very rare for a firmware update in a vehicle to cause regressions. Nearly all of the time, "bugs" in vehicular firmware are really unanticipated results of intentional design choices. For example, the Partial EMCC (PEMCC) code in early-1990s Chrysler A604 transmission firmware that slowly trashed torque converters was intended to improve fuel economy by partially engaging the torque converter lockup clutch - it turned out this wore out the clutch FAR faster than any of the mechanical engineers anticipated. In 1993 or so, this feature was removed once its contribution to premature transmission wear was discovered. (So yeah, this was a case where a bug really WAS originally a feature!)
"I try to explain to him he would be better off just buying a phone directly and not getting locked into a contract but he won't hear it."
If he is planning on staying with Verizon for two more year anyway, then how is he better off? I don't know of any provider that gives "bring your own phone" discounts, so if you are going to be with the company for two years, why not get the subsidy on the phone? Otherwise, you are paying a few hundred dollars extra for the phone and still paying the same price for service, only gaining a small amount of freedom that is irrelevant if your plan is to stay with the company for two years anyway.
"and probably 4 out of 5 times, fast-forwarding or rewinding will desync the audio"
Sorry to say it, but an HD TiVo might not improve anything there.
Why? Because just like the TW box, the HD TiVos directly record the digital transport stream rather than encode the analog video signal in realtime. The streams themselves are broken from TW, not the playback/recording device. (Some worse than others - TWC's re-feed of CBS in my area is AWFUL. I have to perform a lossless transcode of every CBS recording in MythTV to fix CBS streams. Other channels are fine to play back even with direct recording.)
If it were that easy to check for and find all infections, we wouldn't have them.
" An example of a juicy tidbit he revealed is that managers of a Latvian bank did not take the salary cuts they promised they would after the government bailed them out of economic trouble."
Are you sure he's actually talking about Latvia and not the US?
Oh wait, AIG's execs had the balls to promise nothing and actually give themselves *bonuses* for running their company so far into the ground that it needed a bailout.
DAoC did pretty well. There were specific areas reserved for PvP (kind of like BGs), except that they were VERY large areas with widespread objectives. To achieve some objectives would require a many-hour cooperative campaign involving many players (frequently 100-200+) from each realm.
Relic raids in DAoC could easily start out in early morning and constantly pick up in pace all day, usually taking 2-3 hours of escalation before anyone even declared "Call to arms, this looks like a relic raid in progress!"
One of the keys to the success of DAoC in that regard was the fact that on normal servers, certain areas were specifically geared towards RvR, and other areas were specifically set aside as PvE only for leveling/gearing.
Also, it was specifically set up that gear gained in PvE (exception: Catacombs expansion) would help you with RvR (to some degree to the dismay of hardcore RvRers, which is why Mythic eventually added more ways to purchase things with BPs and RPs.)
It's not like WoW where you have the PvE path and the PvP path and the rewards and required gear are almost mutually exclusive.
Aion has a lot of the best elements of DAoC, the main problem is that it is VERY grind-intensive and makes it difficult to reach the endgame, while DAoC's design focused primarily on life past 50 (exception: Catacombs again).
Yeah, it was my understanding that the Android app store was more locked down than the typical method of distribution for WM phones.
Yes, a warning pops up when something is unsigned. What's nice is that Windows Mobile will REMEMBER your decision and not ask you again unless it detects that the executable file has changed. Just enough protection (This app is unsigned, are you sure you want to install it?) without being annoying ("The Gmail Java applet is unsigned. Are you sure you want to connect to the Internet? This may result in data charges." over and over again - I HAVE AN UNLIMITED DATA PLAN, STOP ASKING ME ON EVERY URL REQUEST DAMMIT!")
This is false. Using a physics-based approach (relying on the fact that many natural processes are truly random), one can generate random numbers by sampling natural processes.
Common approaches include measurement of Zener diode noise, ring oscillator drift.
Less common approaches include taking a picture of a lava lamp and hashing the pixel values using SHA.
Intel had one based on drift between two ring buffer oscillators, one of which was perturbed by a noise source (Zener I think?). They ran at significantly different frequencies (one around 100x the other), and the slow oscillator was used to sample the state of the fast one. This resulted in a reasonably random series of bits. Additional methods (read literature on HWRNG design) were used to de-bias the results even further.
This HWRNG was built into quite a few of their chipsets, I think it was around the Pentium III days. For whatever reason this capability was removed in newer chipsets.
Yup, the need for true random numbers in crypto is when choosing a key - if the key generation isn't truly random, it's possible to predict.
If I recall correctly, this is what happened with the OpenSSL fiasco - someone broke one of the entropy sources in the key generation mechanism.
There are plenty of processes in nature that lead to true randomness - Zener diodes in reverse bias are notoriously noisy, this is usually a problem, but people have used that flaw to create hardware RNGs. Intel had a true hardware RNG based on measuring the drift between two ring oscillators, one of which was perturbed by a noise source, in some of their older chipsets. In fact that approach sounds a LOT like this "new" "flip-flop" based approach.
Some consumer crypto approaches (IIRC TrueCrypt uses this approach) rely on some degree of randomness in human keystroke intervals that can be de-biased and then used as a seed for a pseudorandom number generator.
In that configuration, the shields do not carry current, and ideally should be tied together. Only the center conductors carry current.
Performance-wise it would be very similar to shielded twisted pair, except that the construction of STP pretty much guarantees that the two conductors in the pair are of equal length - MUCH harder with the "two coaxial cables" approach.
As I mentioned in another post, this method is actually the reccommended method for performing 802.3 compliance verification using LeCroy serial data analyzers (such as the SDA9000) and their Ethernet test fixture. Each wire into the pair is wired to 50 ohm microstripline on a breakout board, which goes to a 50 ohm SMA connector. SMA-to-BNC coax cables go to two inputs of the SDA, and the unit does trace math to analyze the differential signal.
To some degree, we already do that with vocational and technical (vo-tech) high schools.
http://www.scvths.org/scvths/Programs%20of%20Study/
"That's exactly what happened in my school system. When I was a senior in high school (I couldn't graduate early because of the required 16 quarters of gym class per state law in NJ)"
I grew up in NJ and had a similar problem. I was lucky and discovered the Rutgers High School Scholars program, which was specifically designed to allow high schoolers to take a few classes per semester at Rutgers.
If I had not been in the Rutgers HSS program, I would have HATED my senior year in high school, since in addition to the three classes I was taking (Gym was required, Language and Literature aka English was required for any student attending school, and Wind Ensemble because I actually wanted to take it), I would have had to fill my high school schedule with classes I had no interest in taking. Instead, thanks to HSS, I was able to get an exemption to my high school's minimum courseload requirements.
In some ways I'm glad things worked out that way and I didn't graduate early, the "part high school part college" year of transition period helped a lot in terms of developing maturity without feeling like the system was holding me back. In addition this meant starting college at 18 (It sucked to be the one 17 year old on the bus when we went on a marching band roadtrip to Canada my freshman year), and getting to turn 21 in October of my junior year of college instead of senior year. :)
I think it would be a far better approach than what is proposed to continue targeting an age of aproximately 18 for high school graduation, but providing more opportunities for gifted high school students to enrich themselves. We do have this to some degree with programs such as the Rutgers program I attended and magnet schools, but they're rare and far too much of a pain in the ass to participate in thanks to the "everyone's a winner" mentality that No Child Left Behind put into law.
Coax provides far better frequency response than UTP.
Coax also has LOWER impedance than Cat5 - typically 50 or 75 ohms, as opposed to 100 for Cat5.
However, because Cat5 is a set of balanced transmission lines and coax is unbalanced, it still won't work unless you use two 50 ohm coax lines of exactly equal length per pair. Most coax in homes is 75 ohm coax.
Cat5 is 100 ohms +/- 10% tolerance.
Coax in MOST homes is 75 ohms, as that's what cable TV and TV antennas standardized on. (Partly because it was a 4:1 ratio to 300 ohm twinlead.)
Coax for most other radio systems NOT TV-related is 50 ohms. You can actually use two 50 ohm unbalanced cables of equal length to form a 100 ohm balanced transmission line.
Nope, one coax cable != one twisted pair, for the reasons you stated. Twisted pair is balanced, coax is unbalanced. Also, usually TP is 100-110 ohm impedance, coax is 50 or 75.
However, if you wire it properly and keep lengths VERY well controlled, two unbalanced 50 ohm lengths of coax of the same length can be used to form a balanced 100 ohm transmission line. One wire to the center of Coax A, one to the center of Coax B, tie the shields together.
This is, in fact, how the Ethernet breakout/test fixture for some LeCroy serial data analyzers works. The LeCroy has 50 ohm BNC inputs, each of which go to an SMA on the test fixture. Two adjacent BNCs go to the two wires of a pair on the Cat5.
Um, "complete failure to understand parent post"?
This thread is talking about using the existing coax runs to wirepull Cat5 through the walls, not trying to run signals through the coax.
In theory, one could use four 50 ohm coax cables to run 100BaseT - Two 50 ohm single-ended coax cables can be used to form a 100 ohm differential connection, same characteristic impedance as Cat5 but with a hell of a lot more shielding and isolation.
However, if they were 75 ohm TV connections, they're useless as anything other than a physical cable to attach another cable to for the purposes of pulling it through the wall.
This doesn't make sense. Buzz didn't retroactively apply to linked content. I know Buzz autolinked a bunch of my associated content sources, but when I logged in, I had a "clean" Buzz slate.
The only thing I can think of is that MAYBE Buzz would start auto-updating before you first logged into it?
It didn't retroactively update from any of the autolinked sources for me, I know that. Buzz did autolink to some content sources, but despite that (although it could have been lack of updates from said sources), when I first logged in I had no outgoing "buzzes". Thus it didn't matter that a bunch of people were autofollowing me and I was following them.
Problem was that the invites came out too slowly. People would often get an invite and have one friend that used it, while the rest of their friends didn't.
They'd stop using it, and then their friends would join it without even knowing they were a user. I know I haven't logged into Wave in ages because no one I knew used it, and it didn't autoleverage my existing Google social networks like Buzz does.