I'm sure it's the fastest thing Apple has ever produced. But it's a far cry from the fastest thing on the "Windows" side of the market. And I'm willing to bet that the faster things on the IBM PC side are more affordable as well.
But, welcome in earnest to the multi-gigahertz fold, Apple.
The issue is with secure and contained execution environments. Properly "jailing" software (whether a process in an operating system, or a thread and window box on a preview pane in Outlook) is the real answer.
No, in the specific context of Outlook worms, I have to disagree. I also disagree with Bill Joy on this specific point; Buffer overruns aren't necessary to take control of Outlook. In the context of just about any other generic example, I do agree with both of you.
Outlook requires access to the address-book component to function properly, and because Outlook is part of the MSO suite, it is built with macro functionality using VBS. As far as I know, there aren't any privilege levels in the VB interpreter, so if your macro can use one function, it can use 'em all. Also, Windows opens certain registered types of files without asking about a helper application. It's odd to think of it this way, but Outlook/VBS/Registry aren't doing anything they weren't expected to do. Jailing it isn't going to prevent it from spreading the VBS worms we've seen thus far... Well, not without completely breaking Outlook.
The solution to Outlook's problem is probably going to be difficult for Microsoft to apply (it will break some stuff), will make things less convenient for users, but is definitely do-able in a reasonable amount of time.
Some suggestions of mine:
Messages should be stored in plaintext format with encoded attachments (most likely how they're received). This gives the added bonus that a third-party filter can examine the message before Outlook attempts to decode it, and it would be easier to write an external filter.
Attachments aren't decoded until the user actually manually initiates the opening of the attachment, (simply viewing the message doesn't trigger decoding of attachments.)
Related to the above, the default action with an encoded binary which doesn't have an associated helper application is to download to disk, and to present a warning about viruses or trojans when done.
Outlook maintains its own list of helper applications and file associations, apart from what is in the Windows registry, sort of like how Netscape does it.
Preview only previews the plaintext body. HTML is not previewed without a warning. Even better would be a configurable HTML filter which disables certain tags, sort of like in PhpBB. Or Slashdot!
The default action with some sort of out-of-spec text attachment (or deviation from message format) is to display the text in the preview pane, not pass it to Windows' shell execute to decide its fate. Worst case scenario: Garbage on the screen.
HTML can't be rendered inside of Outlook's interface. It must be passed to an external viewer, with optional tag filtering applied in the process. This viewer can be IE, but an alternate, more secure browser could be used. It's annoying, but IT would then have a choice besides just dumping Outlook.
I realize that the above would break those one-file HTML glob pages with images that folks like to send out. Good. Those are stupid for two reasons: 1) A remote user can include all manner of weird binary data, and 2) PS and PDF already cover that functionality and do a much better job with presentation.
Now if we could only apply this thinking to CIPA (the Children's Internet Protection Act), which requires filtering of "all images" which are "pornographic" or "offensive". Not only can we not decide as a society where the boundry lies, but we're supposed make a computer apply HAL-9000-like judgement (which requires an emotional component) and use image recognition technology that is nowhere near that level of sophistication.
If you poke around long enough, you'll find the the source code to some of these cheats as I have. The one I've seen involve DLL-injection on the client side. Speedhacks are the only cheats that affect client updates, and are therefore suspicious to the server, (the server "gives" the client "x" amount of "moves" per time period, using a speed hack "uses" all those "moves" up in a shorter amount of time. If the client attempts to use more "moves" than is allotted, it looks suspicious.) The source to the cheats involves some header files that are handed out in the SDKs, i.e. I don't see anything that would hint that the cheat coders have the source to the engine.
Wallhacks, obviously, are relatively easier. The hardest ones to detect simply manipulate textures. The simplest I've seen this far is a spray-logo cheat that makes the sprite transparent; Spray it on a wall, and you can look through it.
As far as I can tell, aimbots don't need to monitor or rewrite any client updates en route to the server. They're kind of simple actually, the basic principles being:
Hook into D3D/OpenGL
Look for texture with ID #[whatever] which corresponds to [body part] of enemy player model
Align center of screen with of enemy player model
The fact that there is no detection on the server end makes it really difficult to spot them. The first aiming aids could be spotted by astute admins, because there was often a "snapping on target" when they were activated, and inexperienced cheaters didn't realize that the cheats aimed for the nearest enemy player model, even if there was a wall in the way. Now it's harder, because cheat coders have added randomness to the code, like only 1-in-4 shots is spot on, and take-up is smoother when the cheat is activated.
Honestly, the leaking of a dated build of HL2 isn't going to affect cheats. I just don't want that leak(er) to become a scape-goat for the game industry.
The real risk is cheating, which could very well have a real impact on sales (why buy HL2 to play the new CS when the new CS has at least as many cheats as the old one?). Plus if cheating is rampant, it could scare away licensees.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the most widely used cheats, aimbots and wallhacks, rely heavily on hooking into D3D or OpenGL to grab information. This isn't going to change significantly before HL2 is released, and the API references are available to anyone. Although there's some extra work involved in wedging the cheats in to control aiming, I don't think the source code is going to make a difference, especially since the SDK is going to end up "out there" for mod developers.
The problem with the HL community is that cheating is acceptable. Unless Valve do some weird modifications to DX, cheats are going to appear very soon after HL2 is released. I'm giving it 3 months before HL2 cheats appear.
So in that sense, it is hypocritical for them to be so eager to use the very software that they tried to kill.
You may have noticed that there is a big difference between "us" and "them". It's okay for "them" to save a big bundle on production and distribution, and have their business model officially supported by the government, but we won't be seeing any competitive pricing in the near future. I'm no fan of the current trend of widespread copyright infringement, but the consumers need more choices than pay full retail price, or illegally copy it.
You know, I dug deep down in my heart, and realized that I just don't care. Product placement doesn't bother me one bit. Besides, it's been going on in movies and television for years. Heck, back in the old days of live TV broadcasts, the host would stop in the middle of the show and pitch an ad himself.
Hey, if it would cut commercial time down from 1/3 of the hour to even half that, I'd be all for it! They should sell ad spots on professional athletes' clothes. There's an idea! Imagine the possibilities with product placement on the soft-core porn channels!
Where I object to advertising is with media that I pay for, such as video rentals, or on my Internet connection. I don't mind ads like those on Slashdot, but software which takes control of your computer, or spawns pop-up windows that take focus, or includes seizure-inducing color cycling should be made illegal.
Someone should tell the harassvertizers that the reason I'm not buying their product is because it sucks, not because I didn't notice the ad. I don't gamble, I don't order CDs on the web [because they're the same price everywhere, overpriced], I don't need a mortgage, I'm really not into home decorating, I don't want to buy a pager, I have no interest in being my own stock broker, and my penis is large enough, thanks.
Wow, not only do we have trollers in the comments section, one actually got to post an article on the front page.
"Maybe we should all start to think about jumping ship?" That reminds me of a alternative power generation suggestion in The Dilbert Future. Basically it involves setting up some small windmills at a Mac user's group, then suggesting they all switch to Windows PCs.
Perhaps the editor has re-routed the line going to the Slashdot's hosting service, so the incoming packets are rerouted through the coils of a large electrical motor.
No, all that would be exempted would be dividends taxes. That doesn't mean that the corporation providing those dividends doesn't pay taxes on their profit, or payroll taxes, or workman's comp or unemployment.
The investor still pays income tax (if he's working; most likely since you don't make $200,000 a year on investments by sitting at home scratching your nuts), higher tax rates if he's married, tax on interest, property tax, sales tax, possibly a state income tax, capital gains tax (if an investment really pays off), the USF tax on each phone in his name, local taxes on each gallon of gasoline his cars use, driver's license fees, vehicle registration fees, emissions testing fees... Pretty much some kind of fee for everything he does, since nearly everything involves the government in some way.
There are some people that can live on interest earned from a family fortune (John Kerry's wife), but those people are few and far between. Generally everyone who has that kind of money have worked their whole lives for it, and are significant contributors - through taxation - to all the popular social programs which have sprung forth since LBJ's administration. Bush wants to eliminate double-taxation of dividends. He's not going to be able to do it, so he'll probably settle for a reduction on a small subset of the investors. I don't blame him on this one, the practice is stupid and unfair. Imagine if you paid income tax when you received your paycheck and whenever you spent a portion of it, in addition to the taxes that your employer forks over to the government just to keep you on the payroll.
"...beg forgiveness for ever doubting that his resolve to make sure that every person making over $200,000 a year from investments would not only have to pay no taxes..."
Uh... Those people account for 80%+ of the tax revenue. I think it'd be in your best interest to have them continue to make generate income.
OJ Simpson was found innocent of the criminal charges of murder leveled against him, but he was still sued successfully in civil court.
No, OJ simpson was presumed innocent by the court. It doesn't mean he was innocent in a literal sense, like a fuzzy baby bunny or something. It means the prosecutors have to build a case against him from a blank slate; e.g. his arrest couldn't be used as proof of guilt.
The prosecutors failed to build a case that showed OJ as the murderer beyond a reasonable doubt, so there was no conviction. He wasn't proven innocent. The investigators botched the evidence, so the jury was filled with doubt, and he wasn't proven guilty either.
No. If you don't want the patch, don't download it.
I think the point is that any newer (media) software written for Windows will eventually tie-in with the RM APIs, so you won't have a choice in the future. It won't be as simple as "don't use it." MS is apparently floating the balloon to see how the users react. Unfortunately, most users lack the forward-thinking ability that supposedly distinguishes them from their simian ancestors (I can't name one person who patched for MS Blaster - until after their PCs were infected) they won't give a hoot until they're being charged $1 every time they listen to an MP3.
Linux is secure for the same reason as Mac OS X is secure: it's not the dominant OS.
That statement is loaded. Linux isn't secure. The ptrace-kmod vulnerability is still present in the two most common kernel branches. The most common network services and applications likely to be moving data on the Internet all have had multiple, major vulnerabilities over the past couple years. These include Apache, Sendmail, OpenSSH, OpenSSL, and PHP. You may not all one of these, but the majority of Linux sites serving up content do.
There may not be worms, but that isn't because it can't be done. There is sufficient automation in the existing crack tools for Linux. Someone need only take it to the next level and have the cracking tool upload and start a network scanning worm.
RTFA! the car has a 300 mile range, for starters, and secondly, "While it goes into negative territory on uphill acceleration, it flies the other way on downhills, charging the batteries.
I don't care what the article says, the Tzero website page gives the figures "100 miles" at "60 mph," which is typical highway driving. I seriously doubt you can conserve that much and still drive safely (i.e. maintaining speed with traffic.) I could get another 50 miles of range out of my car if I stuck it in neutral and coasted as much as possible, but that would probably make a whole lot of people really, really pissed off.
As far as price/performance fuel wise: $200,000 buys a lot of petrol! But, that's really not a fair argument, since the infrastructure is currently built around ICE vehicles.
Emissions? The emissions are simply appearing elsewhere, near power plants. I thought I addressed this point in my first post.
Something needs to bridge the gap while we improve electrical generation storage technology. The cost is just too much. I've wondered about this before, and I'll babble about it again. Where are the hybrid gas/electric kits for existing cars? That would be a great project!
...So I might as well bring up the negative points.
* It may do 0-60 in 4 seconds, but so can lots of vehicles if you do hairy modifications to the engine and drivetrain. The car is tiny and light, obviously, since it needs only 200 horsepower to produce those figures.
* Note the careful wording: "...Efficiency *to* 70 mpg." That tells me they are taking an average and counting when the motors are off while cruising.
* Good luck getting a charge when you run out of juice in the middle of nowhere. At least the AAA can bring you a 5 gallon container of petrol with a conventional vehicle.
* A 100 mile cruising range is less than one half of the range of a typical passenger car with an ICE, and that's taking into account that the motors can be shut off some of the time. What is the actual cruise range on the hilly terrain in my part of the country? 50 miles?
* The vehicle shown has less interior room than the Corvette (arguably one of the most uncomfortable cars to ride in) and is miniscule. Put the Corvette's engine in that chassis, sans the batteries, and you'll probably get sub-3 second 0-60 time, if the wheels can get a decent grip.
* Totally electric cars are less efficient in the winter, when power is drawn for heating.
* The emissions aren't "near zero," it's just that the extra pollution would be emitted from power generation facilities. Those power generators may be more efficient, but an increase in output (to supply these vehicles) is going to introduce tons (literally) more pollutants into small areas of the planet.
* The battery system is totally impractical, and a chemical nightmare after a collision.
Can we move the focus off of electric vehicles, and concentrate on better power generation and storage technology?
Uh, there is some confusion here. If the vendor says the machine has a 1GB drive, chances are that it does -- but unformatted. Unfortunately, it's not like the contents of a cereal box, and users should be well aware that how the drive is formatted affects the net amount of space available for data. NTFS volumes are going to need more space for overhead than FAT16 volumes. "Some settling may occur during shipment."
The real shyster-ing occurs with performance figures for hard disks, and also with networking devices. Especially wireless devices. I'd like to see "net" figures for these instead of theoretical maximum. I've got a SCSI card that claims a 40MB/s transfer rate, as well as a hard disk. It does deliver 40MB/s, but that is the "gross" transfer speed; it only happens between the controller's cache and the computer's memory. The sustained transfer rate is more like 14MB/s. That is a *huge* difference, and the manufacturer should give a reasonable figure instead of the absolute maximum throughput from a tiny amount of RAM to the core. The layman's term for this practice is "lying."
I could conceivably have two disks, one 5400 rpm, and another 10,000 rpm, and there would be nothing to tell them apart, since both would claim the bogus 40MB/s tranfer rate. Yet one of those drives will have a better transfer rate. The consumer does not know what he is getting! It would be a different issue if, say, the actual transfer rate were withing 10-15 per cent of the claimed figure, but we're talking 1/3 to 1/2 the claimed figure.
Here are some performance claims that I ran across, paired with my tested performance results:
Likewise with wireless devices, where the vendor fails to mention the overhead of the radio, ethernet, and other protocols. That's great for me, because I understand, but the average consumer is being fleeced. I find the typical wireless data tranceiver delivers 1/7th of the claimed transfer rate on average. Image if Chevy claimed the new Camaro to have 300hp, but it tested on the dyno at 43hp. There would be hell to pay!
It certainly isn't because of boot times. Even Microsoft couldn't fix this one. XP boots to the log-on banner fast enough, but once I log-on, I have to sit and wait another 60 seconds until the rest of the OS loads.
Anyone have any idea why the Microsoft agitators are out in full force? Does this have to do with the fact that IIS lost so much marketshare to Apache?
Whenever this happens, something bad is about to happen with Microsoft; usually a big PR hit.
Dali is long dead, now they're going to be making money in his name. I hope his surviving relatives sue the living shit out of Disney for any profit that is taken in connection with this work. I want to see massive civil awards against Disney. It's only fair.
That there isn't a tinkerer's market for converting existing vehicles to gas/electric hybrids. There's a project I wouldn't mind undertaking, if only battery technology weren't still in the stone age. You could save loads of dough as well.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure it's the fastest thing Apple has ever produced. But it's a far cry from the fastest thing on the "Windows" side of the market. And I'm willing to bet that the faster things on the IBM PC side are more affordable as well.
But, welcome in earnest to the multi-gigahertz fold, Apple.
No, in the specific context of Outlook worms, I have to disagree. I also disagree with Bill Joy on this specific point; Buffer overruns aren't necessary to take control of Outlook. In the context of just about any other generic example, I do agree with both of you.
Outlook requires access to the address-book component to function properly, and because Outlook is part of the MSO suite, it is built with macro functionality using VBS. As far as I know, there aren't any privilege levels in the VB interpreter, so if your macro can use one function, it can use 'em all. Also, Windows opens certain registered types of files without asking about a helper application. It's odd to think of it this way, but Outlook/VBS/Registry aren't doing anything they weren't expected to do. Jailing it isn't going to prevent it from spreading the VBS worms we've seen thus far... Well, not without completely breaking Outlook.
The solution to Outlook's problem is probably going to be difficult for Microsoft to apply (it will break some stuff), will make things less convenient for users, but is definitely do-able in a reasonable amount of time.
Some suggestions of mine:
Messages should be stored in plaintext format with encoded attachments (most likely how they're received). This gives the added bonus that a third-party filter can examine the message before Outlook attempts to decode it, and it would be easier to write an external filter.
Attachments aren't decoded until the user actually manually initiates the opening of the attachment, (simply viewing the message doesn't trigger decoding of attachments.)
Related to the above, the default action with an encoded binary which doesn't have an associated helper application is to download to disk, and to present a warning about viruses or trojans when done.
Outlook maintains its own list of helper applications and file associations, apart from what is in the Windows registry, sort of like how Netscape does it.
Preview only previews the plaintext body. HTML is not previewed without a warning. Even better would be a configurable HTML filter which disables certain tags, sort of like in PhpBB. Or Slashdot!
The default action with some sort of out-of-spec text attachment (or deviation from message format) is to display the text in the preview pane, not pass it to Windows' shell execute to decide its fate. Worst case scenario: Garbage on the screen.
HTML can't be rendered inside of Outlook's interface. It must be passed to an external viewer, with optional tag filtering applied in the process. This viewer can be IE, but an alternate, more secure browser could be used. It's annoying, but IT would then have a choice besides just dumping Outlook.
I realize that the above would break those one-file HTML glob pages with images that folks like to send out. Good. Those are stupid for two reasons: 1) A remote user can include all manner of weird binary data, and 2) PS and PDF already cover that functionality and do a much better job with presentation.
Now if we could only apply this thinking to CIPA (the Children's Internet Protection Act), which requires filtering of "all images" which are "pornographic" or "offensive". Not only can we not decide as a society where the boundry lies, but we're supposed make a computer apply HAL-9000-like judgement (which requires an emotional component) and use image recognition technology that is nowhere near that level of sophistication.
Wallhacks, obviously, are relatively easier. The hardest ones to detect simply manipulate textures. The simplest I've seen this far is a spray-logo cheat that makes the sprite transparent; Spray it on a wall, and you can look through it.
As far as I can tell, aimbots don't need to monitor or rewrite any client updates en route to the server. They're kind of simple actually, the basic principles being:
Hook into D3D/OpenGL
Look for texture with ID #[whatever] which corresponds to [body part] of enemy player model
Align center of screen with of enemy player model
The fact that there is no detection on the server end makes it really difficult to spot them. The first aiming aids could be spotted by astute admins, because there was often a "snapping on target" when they were activated, and inexperienced cheaters didn't realize that the cheats aimed for the nearest enemy player model, even if there was a wall in the way. Now it's harder, because cheat coders have added randomness to the code, like only 1-in-4 shots is spot on, and take-up is smoother when the cheat is activated.
Honestly, the leaking of a dated build of HL2 isn't going to affect cheats. I just don't want that leak(er) to become a scape-goat for the game industry.
The real risk is cheating, which could very well have a real impact on sales (why buy HL2 to play the new CS when the new CS has at least as many cheats as the old one?). Plus if cheating is rampant, it could scare away licensees.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the most widely used cheats, aimbots and wallhacks, rely heavily on hooking into D3D or OpenGL to grab information. This isn't going to change significantly before HL2 is released, and the API references are available to anyone. Although there's some extra work involved in wedging the cheats in to control aiming, I don't think the source code is going to make a difference, especially since the SDK is going to end up "out there" for mod developers.
The problem with the HL community is that cheating is acceptable. Unless Valve do some weird modifications to DX, cheats are going to appear very soon after HL2 is released. I'm giving it 3 months before HL2 cheats appear.
Haven't Netscape and Real Player been done this for several years now?
So in that sense, it is hypocritical for them to be so eager to use the very software that they tried to kill.
You may have noticed that there is a big difference between "us" and "them". It's okay for "them" to save a big bundle on production and distribution, and have their business model officially supported by the government, but we won't be seeing any competitive pricing in the near future. I'm no fan of the current trend of widespread copyright infringement, but the consumers need more choices than pay full retail price, or illegally copy it.
Anyway, aside from that, I say, "go Linux!" =D
...for OpenSSL to include 'make uninstall'?
You know, I dug deep down in my heart, and realized that I just don't care. Product placement doesn't bother me one bit. Besides, it's been going on in movies and television for years. Heck, back in the old days of live TV broadcasts, the host would stop in the middle of the show and pitch an ad himself.
Hey, if it would cut commercial time down from 1/3 of the hour to even half that, I'd be all for it! They should sell ad spots on professional athletes' clothes. There's an idea! Imagine the possibilities with product placement on the soft-core porn channels!
Where I object to advertising is with media that I pay for, such as video rentals, or on my Internet connection. I don't mind ads like those on Slashdot, but software which takes control of your computer, or spawns pop-up windows that take focus, or includes seizure-inducing color cycling should be made illegal.
Someone should tell the harassvertizers that the reason I'm not buying their product is because it sucks, not because I didn't notice the ad. I don't gamble, I don't order CDs on the web [because they're the same price everywhere, overpriced], I don't need a mortgage, I'm really not into home decorating, I don't want to buy a pager, I have no interest in being my own stock broker, and my penis is large enough, thanks.
Wow, not only do we have trollers in the comments section, one actually got to post an article on the front page.
"Maybe we should all start to think about jumping ship?" That reminds me of a alternative power generation suggestion in The Dilbert Future. Basically it involves setting up some small windmills at a Mac user's group, then suggesting they all switch to Windows PCs.
Perhaps the editor has re-routed the line going to the Slashdot's hosting service, so the incoming packets are rerouted through the coils of a large electrical motor.
No, all that would be exempted would be dividends taxes. That doesn't mean that the corporation providing those dividends doesn't pay taxes on their profit, or payroll taxes, or workman's comp or unemployment.
The investor still pays income tax (if he's working; most likely since you don't make $200,000 a year on investments by sitting at home scratching your nuts), higher tax rates if he's married, tax on interest, property tax, sales tax, possibly a state income tax, capital gains tax (if an investment really pays off), the USF tax on each phone in his name, local taxes on each gallon of gasoline his cars use, driver's license fees, vehicle registration fees, emissions testing fees... Pretty much some kind of fee for everything he does, since nearly everything involves the government in some way.
There are some people that can live on interest earned from a family fortune (John Kerry's wife), but those people are few and far between. Generally everyone who has that kind of money have worked their whole lives for it, and are significant contributors - through taxation - to all the popular social programs which have sprung forth since LBJ's administration. Bush wants to eliminate double-taxation of dividends. He's not going to be able to do it, so he'll probably settle for a reduction on a small subset of the investors. I don't blame him on this one, the practice is stupid and unfair. Imagine if you paid income tax when you received your paycheck and whenever you spent a portion of it, in addition to the taxes that your employer forks over to the government just to keep you on the payroll.
"...beg forgiveness for ever doubting that his resolve to make sure that every person making over $200,000 a year from investments would not only have to pay no taxes..."
Uh... Those people account for 80%+ of the tax revenue. I think it'd be in your best interest to have them continue to make generate income.
OJ Simpson was found innocent of the criminal charges of murder leveled against him, but he was still sued successfully in civil court.
No, OJ simpson was presumed innocent by the court. It doesn't mean he was innocent in a literal sense, like a fuzzy baby bunny or something. It means the prosecutors have to build a case against him from a blank slate; e.g. his arrest couldn't be used as proof of guilt.
The prosecutors failed to build a case that showed OJ as the murderer beyond a reasonable doubt, so there was no conviction. He wasn't proven innocent. The investigators botched the evidence, so the jury was filled with doubt, and he wasn't proven guilty either.
No. If you don't want the patch, don't download it.
I think the point is that any newer (media) software written for Windows will eventually tie-in with the RM APIs, so you won't have a choice in the future. It won't be as simple as "don't use it." MS is apparently floating the balloon to see how the users react. Unfortunately, most users lack the forward-thinking ability that supposedly distinguishes them from their simian ancestors (I can't name one person who patched for MS Blaster - until after their PCs were infected) they won't give a hoot until they're being charged $1 every time they listen to an MP3.
That statement is loaded. Linux isn't secure. The ptrace-kmod vulnerability is still present in the two most common kernel branches. The most common network services and applications likely to be moving data on the Internet all have had multiple, major vulnerabilities over the past couple years. These include Apache, Sendmail, OpenSSH, OpenSSL, and PHP. You may not all one of these, but the majority of Linux sites serving up content do.
There may not be worms, but that isn't because it can't be done. There is sufficient automation in the existing crack tools for Linux. Someone need only take it to the next level and have the cracking tool upload and start a network scanning worm.
I don't care what the article says, the Tzero website page gives the figures "100 miles" at "60 mph," which is typical highway driving. I seriously doubt you can conserve that much and still drive safely (i.e. maintaining speed with traffic.) I could get another 50 miles of range out of my car if I stuck it in neutral and coasted as much as possible, but that would probably make a whole lot of people really, really pissed off.
As far as price/performance fuel wise: $200,000 buys a lot of petrol! But, that's really not a fair argument, since the infrastructure is currently built around ICE vehicles.
Emissions? The emissions are simply appearing elsewhere, near power plants. I thought I addressed this point in my first post.
Something needs to bridge the gap while we improve electrical generation storage technology. The cost is just too much. I've wondered about this before, and I'll babble about it again. Where are the hybrid gas/electric kits for existing cars? That would be a great project!
...So I might as well bring up the negative points.
* It may do 0-60 in 4 seconds, but so can lots of vehicles if you do hairy modifications to the engine and drivetrain. The car is tiny and light, obviously, since it needs only 200 horsepower to produce those figures.
* Note the careful wording: "...Efficiency *to* 70 mpg." That tells me they are taking an average and counting when the motors are off while cruising.
* Good luck getting a charge when you run out of juice in the middle of nowhere. At least the AAA can bring you a 5 gallon container of petrol with a conventional vehicle.
* A 100 mile cruising range is less than one half of the range of a typical passenger car with an ICE, and that's taking into account that the motors can be shut off some of the time. What is the actual cruise range on the hilly terrain in my part of the country? 50 miles?
* The vehicle shown has less interior room than the Corvette (arguably one of the most uncomfortable cars to ride in) and is miniscule. Put the Corvette's engine in that chassis, sans the batteries, and you'll probably get sub-3 second 0-60 time, if the wheels can get a decent grip.
* Totally electric cars are less efficient in the winter, when power is drawn for heating.
* The emissions aren't "near zero," it's just that the extra pollution would be emitted from power generation facilities. Those power generators may be more efficient, but an increase in output (to supply these vehicles) is going to introduce tons (literally) more pollutants into small areas of the planet.
* The battery system is totally impractical, and a chemical nightmare after a collision.
Can we move the focus off of electric vehicles, and concentrate on better power generation and storage technology?
Uh, there is some confusion here. If the vendor says the machine has a 1GB drive, chances are that it does -- but unformatted. Unfortunately, it's not like the contents of a cereal box, and users should be well aware that how the drive is formatted affects the net amount of space available for data. NTFS volumes are going to need more space for overhead than FAT16 volumes. "Some settling may occur during shipment."
:: Claimed :: Actual
The real shyster-ing occurs with performance figures for hard disks, and also with networking devices. Especially wireless devices. I'd like to see "net" figures for these instead of theoretical maximum. I've got a SCSI card that claims a 40MB/s transfer rate, as well as a hard disk. It does deliver 40MB/s, but that is the "gross" transfer speed; it only happens between the controller's cache and the computer's memory. The sustained transfer rate is more like 14MB/s. That is a *huge* difference, and the manufacturer should give a reasonable figure instead of the absolute maximum throughput from a tiny amount of RAM to the core. The layman's term for this practice is "lying."
I could conceivably have two disks, one 5400 rpm, and another 10,000 rpm, and there would be nothing to tell them apart, since both would claim the bogus 40MB/s tranfer rate. Yet one of those drives will have a better transfer rate. The consumer does not know what he is getting! It would be a different issue if, say, the actual transfer rate were withing 10-15 per cent of the claimed figure, but we're talking 1/3 to 1/2 the claimed figure.
Here are some performance claims that I ran across, paired with my tested performance results:
Interface
EIDE --> 5 MB/s --> 0.7 MB/s
EIDE --> 5 MB/s --> 1.2 MB/s
SCSI --> 10 MB/s --> 6.85 MB/s (a good one, wow!)
SCSI --> 40 MB/s --> 14 MB/s
UATA --> 66 MB/s --> 32 MB/s
Likewise with wireless devices, where the vendor fails to mention the overhead of the radio, ethernet, and other protocols. That's great for me, because I understand, but the average consumer is being fleeced. I find the typical wireless data tranceiver delivers 1/7th of the claimed transfer rate on average. Image if Chevy claimed the new Camaro to have 300hp, but it tested on the dyno at 43hp. There would be hell to pay!
It certainly isn't because of boot times. Even Microsoft couldn't fix this one. XP boots to the log-on banner fast enough, but once I log-on, I have to sit and wait another 60 seconds until the rest of the OS loads.
Cool article though.
Wouldn't that be "Finn-able?"
Amen to that buddy. Ever take apart flash content with swftools on Linux? You wouldn't believe the idiocy of some of these content makers. Example:
1. A clustered bunch of JPEGs to have a "slideshow" type presentation. Already covered by MNG.
2. Wrapping standard audio files. The now infamous "Black Nascar" prank call was just an MP3 wrapped in swf cruft.
3. Wrapping standard compressed video. The now infamous "M16 Mentos" spoof was just an MPEG movie wrapped in swf cruft.
I have no problem playing those with the latest Netscape, but it just pisses me off, because there is nothing wrong with the original format.
Anyone have any idea why the Microsoft agitators are out in full force? Does this have to do with the fact that IIS lost so much marketshare to Apache?
Whenever this happens, something bad is about to happen with Microsoft; usually a big PR hit.
Dali is long dead, now they're going to be making money in his name. I hope his surviving relatives sue the living shit out of Disney for any profit that is taken in connection with this work. I want to see massive civil awards against Disney. It's only fair.
Now, he died because of some torn artery. And unlike your Stephen King post the other day, this one is for real.
That there isn't a tinkerer's market for converting existing vehicles to gas/electric hybrids. There's a project I wouldn't mind undertaking, if only battery technology weren't still in the stone age. You could save loads of dough as well.