I'm sure you don't see how there could be any improvement when you refuse to acknowledge that there is the possibility of fraud in an anonymous system, even when there is documented proof of it happening in the USA. When you refuse to acknowledge reality, there's nothing I could say to change your mind. It's made up and closed.
I didn't offer a suggestion. I made an observation. That an observation is taken as advocating an action is a jump made by the reader, and not by the original observation. Apparently you are agreeing with the observation, since your complaint is about the obvious next steps, and not the observation itself.
In Dallas, when I last sold a gun, there were no laws that would keep a legal gun owner from selling a handgun to a person off the street. What laws are out there making that illegal? You can't sell it to someone you know for a fact is illegal, but selling it to someone questionable is likely perfectly legal.
No, a better analogy is that a pool with no fence is an attractive nuisance, so we should mandate pool fences, or running cars with no people inside are attractive nuisances, so we should make them illegal. Both of those are illegal now. Attractive nuisances are generally illegal. Because society agrees they are a bad thing.
Note, I never argued it would be legal or a good thing to disarm the public, just the specific point about how nearly all "illegal" guns were originally obtained legally. You read into that some intention, then attack the intention. Ignore the fact it's about guns, and ignore the logic for ideology.
But then someone that posts false quotes from "enemies" to make them look dumb likely can't actually examine any facts.
You are not a person or citizen until 18+. And even then, have reduced rights or protections until 21 or 25. But are apparently are a person from conception to birth, but have no rights from birth to 18, when they start to get handed back slowly.
Essentially all the criminal guns were legally made and legally sold (the first time). They were stolen and then used criminally. If you disarm the population, you eliminate the #1 source of guns for criminals.
Your comment is wrong (about countries). In AU and NZ, hacking rates were higher because many releases were Japan-only or US-only, so the "smaller" markets would have more mod chips and such getting around restrictions because the number of legitimate titles was restricted.
If all region codes were eliminated for all markets (not even needed now, as HD PAL and HD NTSC are essentially compatible, PAL/NTSC being one of the reasons I kept hearing for why they were "necessary"), then piracy would decrease, not increase. When they make it harder to buy legal content, more people will pirate. But they want to sell the same thing for $10 in India, $50 in the US, and $100 in NZ/AU. So NZ/AU will pirate because they are paying 10x what others are for the same content.
What's the list of federal agencies that have "special agents"? That's the actual list of agencies with law enforcement duties. Off the top of my head, I've met Special Agents for the IRS and SS (odd how we abbreviate every agency but that one), one enforces tax law, the other is in charge of counterfeiting law. I have no idea if the EPA, FAA, FCC, or any others have "special agents".
The loss of power comes from pumping losses and friction. If you greatly reduce the friction losses with elimination of rings, and keep the valves closed for the last 2 cycles, you'll not be reducing power "greatly" (from an efficiency perspective), but would be reducing it from a power per displacement perspective, but that's less important than efficiency.
Maybe there's be a hybrid where it's 6-stroke for "normal" operation and when running hot, and 4-stroke for when cool enough and extra power is required.
I didn't read the details, but whatever works as "rings" on the top, could be used as rings on the bottom as well, or just reduce, but not eliminate the rings. Perhaps there's a lube that burns clean, so you lube with gasoline (probably not literally, but something that burns close enough to that) and all your listed problems go away.
There has been fraud done where the booths were tampered with to alter the votes as recorded on the ballot. The ballots would be "valid" but the vote would not be for the person intended. Nothing in your chain would ever catch that because the voter can *never* know how his vote is counted in your system. That opens up many different kinds of fraud.
Also, what do you do if you do a recount and find the number of ballots in the box is short or higher than it should be for the number of signed in voters and accounted for ballots? In the US, they make a call to discard the box, including a large number of "valid" votes (yes, including yours), or count the whole thing as valid votes, even with "proof" that they can't all be valid. Which should they choose, and why should they have to choose from one of those two bad options?
I was remembering some of my other air cooled cars in there as well. The 911 (especially later years with oil coolers) were air cooled and took much more oil than most, about twice a "regular" car, if memory serves. I don't remember Dad ever having the valves adjusted in the Bug. But I know he was lax about the oil. It didn't kill the bug, but did kill his '81 Accord, eventually.
I agree the implications are shorter than reality, but I know that the literal meaning is true. I know more than one person who literally waited for a transmission rebuild, in circumstances like I described. I did not mean to imply that it was hours, but that it was not "6 weeks for parts, plus 2 weeks after that to schedule time in the shop, then a swap can be done" as many things are today.
I'm not claiming punchcards are better. In fact, I'm not stating things were better when cars were easier to fix. You are making up things I never said. You are the one assuming that "easier" means better, then equating "easier" with "harder."
I've had multiple people agree with me when I said the same thing elsewhere in this article. Also, I have had one rebuilt while I waited. It was a common road-trip "horror story" to have to get a hotel for a night or two to wait for a rebuild. Not as quick as Jiffy Lube oil change, but when you are far from home, it's easier to wait than fly home and fly back in a day or two.
My Bug was getting 40+, but didn't quite have the range because the tank was small. No warm up time needed, just pull the choke and go. With the larger oil capacity of the aircooled engines, so long as you didn't over heat it, you can let it go longer than you should (10k miles wouldn't cause too many issues, so long as you drove it often enough to keep it from gumming up).
Why do you hate me, and who are you? If the post is good, mod it up, I'm at karma cap anyway, so it won't help me as a person (not that slashdot karma is a big deal).
One of the reasons for going from 2-stroke to 4-stroke was heat. So the "fix" to your problem is to go to 6-stroke engines, with extra strokes for cooling. Also, water injection was used to fix that issue in other engines as well. There are lots of ways to fix that. No oil in the chamber doesn't mean you can't spray the back of the piston with a cooling agent (oil in today's cars). I can fix that problem easily in any of a hundred ways (finding the most efficient would be the trick), and you've proposed no other solution to the problem fixed by the air seal.
The comment seemed to be about the components that are too complex (modern automatics, especially CVT), which are no longer servicable, but must be serviced by specialty shops or the dealer/factory. Back in the '60s, if you could get the tranny out of a car, you could likely rebuild it.
I had a '67 Bug. Nearly everything is grandfathered. That car didn't have seatbelts, but was still legal. It wasn't require to pass emissions (it was too old), but the shop would run it anyway for fun, it always passed modern tests. In a pre-cat car 40+ years old. So it didn't need to be tested, and even if it were, it would have passed.
And safety regulations allowed it to be seatbeltless, as it came that way from the factory. And a non-compressible steering column, and "bad" bumpers, and all that. Perfectly legal to keep on the road, even if impossible to sell new.
In the old days, if you blew a transmission, the shop could rebuild it while you waited. Now, they wait for a replacement to be flown in, then swap it out.
But given a choice in the matter, I'll take a few hundred dollars worth of proper winter tires over an expensive AWD/4WD drivetrain, any day of the week when it comes to winter driving: Having two driven axles instead of one doesn't help me stop and doesn't help me stay on the road. Good tires and driving technique do.
You turn with all four wheels. AWD helps you turn. For one, taking a tight turn from a stop on polished ice (in summer tires), FWD will rotate you around your rear wheels. AWD will rotate you around your rear wheels, while simultaneously moving those wheels. For turns, engine braking works all four wheels, not just the front (most people are too abrupt with lifting the throttle when they go too fast, and with FWD, you break the fronts loose, and are often locked into terminal understeer). With AWD, you have more options to get out of terminal understeer, allowing you more control in turns.
Your WRX would be happier (both safer, and more fun), too.
It's much more fun when the limits of traction are much lower. You can fishtail more easily, and practice recoveries for when it isn't controlled. That's plenty fun. Studs on ice will give you more grip than rubber on road. But one of the major drawbacks on studs is that traction is highly variable. A very-hard packed ice with 3" of packed snow on it (packs into a surprisingly thin layer of ice), and your studs will have no more grip than summer tires (they'll peel the top layer from the bottom, but when they are not firmly bonded, that's like wearing socks on the ice). So studs are much more likely to result in overconfidence errors. Summer tires on the same surface are no different than normal because both cases have very little grip.
chains suck. They are used solely for legislative reasons or changing conditions (a cross-country drive with some mountains, where carrying a full set of tires and changing them on the side of the road would be impractical).
Lots of people use them in Alaska. I never did and didn't ever have a problem. The only crashes I ever had in Alaska, I was at a dead stop and hit from behind on sunny days on dry roads in summer (3 times, no it wasn't me stopping short or anything like that). Safe driving is much much more important than studs.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure you don't see how there could be any improvement when you refuse to acknowledge that there is the possibility of fraud in an anonymous system, even when there is documented proof of it happening in the USA. When you refuse to acknowledge reality, there's nothing I could say to change your mind. It's made up and closed.
Why don't the women and children have machetes?
I didn't offer a suggestion. I made an observation. That an observation is taken as advocating an action is a jump made by the reader, and not by the original observation. Apparently you are agreeing with the observation, since your complaint is about the obvious next steps, and not the observation itself.
In Dallas, when I last sold a gun, there were no laws that would keep a legal gun owner from selling a handgun to a person off the street. What laws are out there making that illegal? You can't sell it to someone you know for a fact is illegal, but selling it to someone questionable is likely perfectly legal.
No, a better analogy is that a pool with no fence is an attractive nuisance, so we should mandate pool fences, or running cars with no people inside are attractive nuisances, so we should make them illegal. Both of those are illegal now. Attractive nuisances are generally illegal. Because society agrees they are a bad thing.
Note, I never argued it would be legal or a good thing to disarm the public, just the specific point about how nearly all "illegal" guns were originally obtained legally. You read into that some intention, then attack the intention. Ignore the fact it's about guns, and ignore the logic for ideology.
But then someone that posts false quotes from "enemies" to make them look dumb likely can't actually examine any facts.
PS2's and HDLoaders on the PS2 Linux forums
Then it's:
PSP, Vita, PS3 and PS4 games are not region encoded.
I'm confused, why did you change your focus from specifically PS2 to everything else? Seems pretty deceitful.
You are not a person or citizen until 18+. And even then, have reduced rights or protections until 21 or 25. But are apparently are a person from conception to birth, but have no rights from birth to 18, when they start to get handed back slowly.
Essentially all the criminal guns were legally made and legally sold (the first time). They were stolen and then used criminally. If you disarm the population, you eliminate the #1 source of guns for criminals.
Your comment is wrong (about countries). In AU and NZ, hacking rates were higher because many releases were Japan-only or US-only, so the "smaller" markets would have more mod chips and such getting around restrictions because the number of legitimate titles was restricted.
If all region codes were eliminated for all markets (not even needed now, as HD PAL and HD NTSC are essentially compatible, PAL/NTSC being one of the reasons I kept hearing for why they were "necessary"), then piracy would decrease, not increase. When they make it harder to buy legal content, more people will pirate. But they want to sell the same thing for $10 in India, $50 in the US, and $100 in NZ/AU. So NZ/AU will pirate because they are paying 10x what others are for the same content.
What's the list of federal agencies that have "special agents"? That's the actual list of agencies with law enforcement duties. Off the top of my head, I've met Special Agents for the IRS and SS (odd how we abbreviate every agency but that one), one enforces tax law, the other is in charge of counterfeiting law. I have no idea if the EPA, FAA, FCC, or any others have "special agents".
The loss of power comes from pumping losses and friction. If you greatly reduce the friction losses with elimination of rings, and keep the valves closed for the last 2 cycles, you'll not be reducing power "greatly" (from an efficiency perspective), but would be reducing it from a power per displacement perspective, but that's less important than efficiency.
Maybe there's be a hybrid where it's 6-stroke for "normal" operation and when running hot, and 4-stroke for when cool enough and extra power is required.
I didn't read the details, but whatever works as "rings" on the top, could be used as rings on the bottom as well, or just reduce, but not eliminate the rings. Perhaps there's a lube that burns clean, so you lube with gasoline (probably not literally, but something that burns close enough to that) and all your listed problems go away.
There has been fraud done where the booths were tampered with to alter the votes as recorded on the ballot. The ballots would be "valid" but the vote would not be for the person intended. Nothing in your chain would ever catch that because the voter can *never* know how his vote is counted in your system. That opens up many different kinds of fraud.
Also, what do you do if you do a recount and find the number of ballots in the box is short or higher than it should be for the number of signed in voters and accounted for ballots? In the US, they make a call to discard the box, including a large number of "valid" votes (yes, including yours), or count the whole thing as valid votes, even with "proof" that they can't all be valid. Which should they choose, and why should they have to choose from one of those two bad options?
I was remembering some of my other air cooled cars in there as well. The 911 (especially later years with oil coolers) were air cooled and took much more oil than most, about twice a "regular" car, if memory serves. I don't remember Dad ever having the valves adjusted in the Bug. But I know he was lax about the oil. It didn't kill the bug, but did kill his '81 Accord, eventually.
I agree the implications are shorter than reality, but I know that the literal meaning is true. I know more than one person who literally waited for a transmission rebuild, in circumstances like I described. I did not mean to imply that it was hours, but that it was not "6 weeks for parts, plus 2 weeks after that to schedule time in the shop, then a swap can be done" as many things are today.
I'm not claiming punchcards are better. In fact, I'm not stating things were better when cars were easier to fix. You are making up things I never said. You are the one assuming that "easier" means better, then equating "easier" with "harder."
I've had multiple people agree with me when I said the same thing elsewhere in this article. Also, I have had one rebuilt while I waited. It was a common road-trip "horror story" to have to get a hotel for a night or two to wait for a rebuild. Not as quick as Jiffy Lube oil change, but when you are far from home, it's easier to wait than fly home and fly back in a day or two.
My Bug was getting 40+, but didn't quite have the range because the tank was small. No warm up time needed, just pull the choke and go. With the larger oil capacity of the aircooled engines, so long as you didn't over heat it, you can let it go longer than you should (10k miles wouldn't cause too many issues, so long as you drove it often enough to keep it from gumming up).
Why do you hate me, and who are you? If the post is good, mod it up, I'm at karma cap anyway, so it won't help me as a person (not that slashdot karma is a big deal).
One of the reasons for going from 2-stroke to 4-stroke was heat. So the "fix" to your problem is to go to 6-stroke engines, with extra strokes for cooling. Also, water injection was used to fix that issue in other engines as well. There are lots of ways to fix that. No oil in the chamber doesn't mean you can't spray the back of the piston with a cooling agent (oil in today's cars). I can fix that problem easily in any of a hundred ways (finding the most efficient would be the trick), and you've proposed no other solution to the problem fixed by the air seal.
The comment seemed to be about the components that are too complex (modern automatics, especially CVT), which are no longer servicable, but must be serviced by specialty shops or the dealer/factory. Back in the '60s, if you could get the tranny out of a car, you could likely rebuild it.
I had a '67 Bug. Nearly everything is grandfathered. That car didn't have seatbelts, but was still legal. It wasn't require to pass emissions (it was too old), but the shop would run it anyway for fun, it always passed modern tests. In a pre-cat car 40+ years old. So it didn't need to be tested, and even if it were, it would have passed.
And safety regulations allowed it to be seatbeltless, as it came that way from the factory. And a non-compressible steering column, and "bad" bumpers, and all that. Perfectly legal to keep on the road, even if impossible to sell new.
In the old days, if you blew a transmission, the shop could rebuild it while you waited. Now, they wait for a replacement to be flown in, then swap it out.
But given a choice in the matter, I'll take a few hundred dollars worth of proper winter tires over an expensive AWD/4WD drivetrain, any day of the week when it comes to winter driving: Having two driven axles instead of one doesn't help me stop and doesn't help me stay on the road. Good tires and driving technique do.
You turn with all four wheels. AWD helps you turn. For one, taking a tight turn from a stop on polished ice (in summer tires), FWD will rotate you around your rear wheels. AWD will rotate you around your rear wheels, while simultaneously moving those wheels. For turns, engine braking works all four wheels, not just the front (most people are too abrupt with lifting the throttle when they go too fast, and with FWD, you break the fronts loose, and are often locked into terminal understeer). With AWD, you have more options to get out of terminal understeer, allowing you more control in turns.
Your WRX would be happier (both safer, and more fun), too.
It's much more fun when the limits of traction are much lower. You can fishtail more easily, and practice recoveries for when it isn't controlled. That's plenty fun. Studs on ice will give you more grip than rubber on road. But one of the major drawbacks on studs is that traction is highly variable. A very-hard packed ice with 3" of packed snow on it (packs into a surprisingly thin layer of ice), and your studs will have no more grip than summer tires (they'll peel the top layer from the bottom, but when they are not firmly bonded, that's like wearing socks on the ice). So studs are much more likely to result in overconfidence errors. Summer tires on the same surface are no different than normal because both cases have very little grip.
chains suck. They are used solely for legislative reasons or changing conditions (a cross-country drive with some mountains, where carrying a full set of tires and changing them on the side of the road would be impractical).
Lots of people use them in Alaska. I never did and didn't ever have a problem. The only crashes I ever had in Alaska, I was at a dead stop and hit from behind on sunny days on dry roads in summer (3 times, no it wasn't me stopping short or anything like that). Safe driving is much much more important than studs.