Saturation is more a factor of voltage, not current. But more current through an inductor requires a larger window (hole in core) and so more ferromagnetic material. Also, reducing saturation requires more winding turns (less volts per turn) and so a larger winding and bigger core. More core material will produce more sound, since magnetostriction is a percent change in the core dimensions due to flux density.
Mechanical damping is probably not feasible, since the materials (steel, nickel, cobalt, etc.) involved are very stiff and the damping structure would have to act against that. Encapsulating inductors in some sound deadening material could work. But it would interfere with thermal performance.
Stronger PSU -> Bigger coils. It's the coil core that whines due to magnetostriction.
A laptop won't be of much help. There are a number of buck-boost voltage converters on the motherboard that provide all the different voltage levels needed by the CPU, memory, logic, etc. They use switch mode topologies, which incorporate coils. The alternative, linear regulators, produce a lot of heat due to inefficiency. So laptops are likely going to be better targets.
I'm not so sure about this. I've been behind a few people lately where, when the light turns green, their foot comes off the brake (brake light go out). But they just sit there for another 5 or even 10 seconds. It's a stoner thing, where the train of thought gets broken at some point in the process.
So we will have to reverse the change in law (1996 Telecom Act, I think) that changed call data (metadata) from being the property of the calling/called parties to that of the carrier. The carrier will have a fiduciary duty to protect it's customers property (metadata) from other parties. I can still remember my old telephone service agreement which stated something to the effect that the phone company will access my calling data only for the purpose of call completion and billing.
Also, we will have to give telecoms some protection from retribution by various government agencies in the event that they are 'asked' but choose to protect their customers. This is already common practice in many contracts between private businesses and various government agencies: To indemnify the supplier against legal action stemming from the relationship. One of our local businesses was fined $500 million by the DoJ for ethics violations as a DoD contractor. The Pentagon was forced to cut them a $500 million check, which they just endorsed and handed to the DoJ. Internet service providers will need the same protection codified into law.
It breaks in initramfs which kind of is in the kernel. Since the kernel must have a way to mount root before it can begin to even find init
It looks like its past that point already. udev is trying to start (systemd-udevd.service, etc.). initramfs is fine (which is why you see the initramfs prompt when the 'init' process fails). It is the fall through for an init failure.
Then how are the affected systems dropping to busybox? The kernel has to be OK for that to work. So in this case, it appears that 'B' is in fact broken.
*Things like the dev, udev and other system services need to be started by the init system. These services are very tightly coupled to the kernel and it's not unheard of for a kernel update to break one or two of them. That's why *NIXes are modular. Made up of a bunch of stand-alone utilities. So if one thing breaks, the failure isn't likely to propagate. But what happens if everything goes through one choke point and that is the thing that breaks?
"I really like City Park Apartments. The amenities are nice and the neighbors very accommodating.
- Signed Mr Cockroach, using Anon's Facebook account while he's asleep."
Service providers want to be able to charge a premium for every single bit
Which goes to Wales' other argument: Providing access to the poor. They don't have the money to pay for the premium services. So the more network resources that are dedicated to some basic level of access for everyone aren't likely to provide a profit to the providers. The providers want to assign their resources in tiers and give the best service to people who are more likely to kick back profits from on-line sales to the service providers.
It's also funny to see how the net neutrality argument suddenly changes when the advocates of the profit motive, the Internet as the private property of the service providers runs headlong into Facebook saying, "OK. We don't like your politics. We're going to censor your right wing content." After all, it's Zuckerberg's business. And he's free to do with it as he sees fit. But then it's all, "Muh net neutrality! Not fair!"
Stop thinking in terms of raw materials. Crude oil is both an energy source and feedstock for a lot of finished products. There are a lot of other raw materials that can be mined or grown. Canada has a lot of energy (hydroelectric, uranium) and can use that at home for manufacturing. The USA would like to tell every other nation to shut up and ship the raw resources. Canada needs to think about some vertically integrated, value added manufacturing.
An anecdote: When the USA (and Boeing) pulled the rug out from under Canada's supersonic interceptor, the Arrow, one of the goals of the project was to develop Canada's titanium mining, processing and manufacturing capabilities. Specifically, in the Canadian-built engines that they hoped to sell to other manufacturers. The result was that, when the USA needed titanium for projects like the SR-71, they had to create a cover story and buy the stuff from the Soviet Union. To date, Canada has never pursued this resource or manufacturing capability. I'm not sure if it was fear of the evil Americans shutting them down again. Or just a passive-aggressive 'Fuck you' over the behind the scenes politics.
Espinoza is not accused of having done anything illegal other than selling the Bitcoin. He may have earned it in some perfectly legal enterprise. The only question is whether a person has a responsibility to refuse a transaction if they become aware of potential illegal activities occurring as a result. In other words, are citizens expected to play cop?
"The 9000 series is the most reliable computer ever made. No 9000 computer has ever made a mistake or distorted information. We are all, by any practical definition of the words, foolproof and incapable of error."
Slashdot Mirror
Saturation is more a factor of voltage, not current. But more current through an inductor requires a larger window (hole in core) and so more ferromagnetic material. Also, reducing saturation requires more winding turns (less volts per turn) and so a larger winding and bigger core. More core material will produce more sound, since magnetostriction is a percent change in the core dimensions due to flux density.
Mechanical damping is probably not feasible, since the materials (steel, nickel, cobalt, etc.) involved are very stiff and the damping structure would have to act against that. Encapsulating inductors in some sound deadening material could work. But it would interfere with thermal performance.
Stronger PSU -> Bigger coils. It's the coil core that whines due to magnetostriction.
A laptop won't be of much help. There are a number of buck-boost voltage converters on the motherboard that provide all the different voltage levels needed by the CPU, memory, logic, etc. They use switch mode topologies, which incorporate coils. The alternative, linear regulators, produce a lot of heat due to inefficiency. So laptops are likely going to be better targets.
Either way, I'm ready.
No thanks.
FiOS in my neighborhood. So far, I'm happy with Frontier service.
I'm from WA State and I honk.
wait until they're 150% sure the light is green.
I'm not so sure about this. I've been behind a few people lately where, when the light turns green, their foot comes off the brake (brake light go out). But they just sit there for another 5 or even 10 seconds. It's a stoner thing, where the train of thought gets broken at some point in the process.
Son of NHS.
So we will have to reverse the change in law (1996 Telecom Act, I think) that changed call data (metadata) from being the property of the calling/called parties to that of the carrier. The carrier will have a fiduciary duty to protect it's customers property (metadata) from other parties. I can still remember my old telephone service agreement which stated something to the effect that the phone company will access my calling data only for the purpose of call completion and billing.
Also, we will have to give telecoms some protection from retribution by various government agencies in the event that they are 'asked' but choose to protect their customers. This is already common practice in many contracts between private businesses and various government agencies: To indemnify the supplier against legal action stemming from the relationship. One of our local businesses was fined $500 million by the DoJ for ethics violations as a DoD contractor. The Pentagon was forced to cut them a $500 million check, which they just endorsed and handed to the DoJ. Internet service providers will need the same protection codified into law.
In Washington State, it has gotten worse since pot was legalized. Lots of people just sitting at the intersection in a stupor.
then airlines will lobby to lower their compliance burden too.
Or the airlines will lobby to bring general aviation pilots and operations up to FAR Part 135 standards.
Well I sure hope they're doing a piss poor job at that training.
Train them well. When Asok asks what you do, tell him 1) keep my LinkedIn profile up to date, and 2) surf the web looking for my next job.
It breaks in initramfs which kind of is in the kernel. Since the kernel must have a way to mount root before it can begin to even find init
It looks like its past that point already. udev is trying to start (systemd-udevd.service, etc.). initramfs is fine (which is why you see the initramfs prompt when the 'init' process fails). It is the fall through for an init failure.
A now no longer works
Then how are the affected systems dropping to busybox? The kernel has to be OK for that to work. So in this case, it appears that 'B' is in fact broken.
*Things like the dev, udev and other system services need to be started by the init system. These services are very tightly coupled to the kernel and it's not unheard of for a kernel update to break one or two of them. That's why *NIXes are modular. Made up of a bunch of stand-alone utilities. So if one thing breaks, the failure isn't likely to propagate. But what happens if everything goes through one choke point and that is the thing that breaks?
public opinion is changing in favor of repealing it.
Even among a lot of younger Saudis.
M-x doctor
Emacs is the best editor and no one can attack me!
Why do you say that?
/b/
"I really like City Park Apartments. The amenities are nice and the neighbors very accommodating.
- Signed Mr Cockroach, using Anon's Facebook account while he's asleep."
I don't worry too much about what the tom kents of this world think.
The details will be outlined in your next edition of Newspeak.
Service providers want to be able to charge a premium for every single bit
Which goes to Wales' other argument: Providing access to the poor. They don't have the money to pay for the premium services. So the more network resources that are dedicated to some basic level of access for everyone aren't likely to provide a profit to the providers. The providers want to assign their resources in tiers and give the best service to people who are more likely to kick back profits from on-line sales to the service providers.
It's also funny to see how the net neutrality argument suddenly changes when the advocates of the profit motive, the Internet as the private property of the service providers runs headlong into Facebook saying, "OK. We don't like your politics. We're going to censor your right wing content." After all, it's Zuckerberg's business. And he's free to do with it as he sees fit. But then it's all, "Muh net neutrality! Not fair!"
Stop thinking in terms of raw materials. Crude oil is both an energy source and feedstock for a lot of finished products. There are a lot of other raw materials that can be mined or grown. Canada has a lot of energy (hydroelectric, uranium) and can use that at home for manufacturing. The USA would like to tell every other nation to shut up and ship the raw resources. Canada needs to think about some vertically integrated, value added manufacturing.
An anecdote: When the USA (and Boeing) pulled the rug out from under Canada's supersonic interceptor, the Arrow, one of the goals of the project was to develop Canada's titanium mining, processing and manufacturing capabilities. Specifically, in the Canadian-built engines that they hoped to sell to other manufacturers. The result was that, when the USA needed titanium for projects like the SR-71, they had to create a cover story and buy the stuff from the Soviet Union. To date, Canada has never pursued this resource or manufacturing capability. I'm not sure if it was fear of the evil Americans shutting them down again. Or just a passive-aggressive 'Fuck you' over the behind the scenes politics.
2) You fear enslavement by men using AI... vs using other humans?
Which just leaves me to wonder: Who will everyone be voting for this fall?
Espinoza is not accused of having done anything illegal other than selling the Bitcoin. He may have earned it in some perfectly legal enterprise. The only question is whether a person has a responsibility to refuse a transaction if they become aware of potential illegal activities occurring as a result. In other words, are citizens expected to play cop?
"The 9000 series is the most reliable computer ever made. No 9000 computer has ever made a mistake or distorted information. We are all, by any practical definition of the words, foolproof and incapable of error."