A friend of mine worked in a factory that made liquid soap. She ran a bottling machine. She said there would be batches of hundreds of bottles at a time. Each batch would have a different label, and would sell at a different price in the store. But they were filling them with the same slop from the same tank.
Peter Gabriel was quoted as saying, "I'd like to hit the RIAA with a SLEDGE-HAMMER dunt-duh. After all, I've kicked the RIAA habit, (kicked the habit, whoo)"
I think it is interesting that, Windows running on a 2 CPU machine requires a 2 CPU license, but, say, 5 instances of VMWare running on a single CPU, each hosting an instance of Windows, requires five licenses. (Six if the instances of VMWare are themselves running on Windows)
Also, what if there was a VMWare-like program that simulated a SMP machine? Would that require a multiple CPU license to run Windows? Even if this program that emulated a SMP machine was running on a single CPU?
If artistic black and white is your thing, consider picking up an old security camera and a video input card. Sure, the focus is terrible, there is no sound, the contrast sucks, and it is real grainy, but this just adds to the consuming intensity of your work. No?
Gotta wonder what they are saying now. Think about the original Halloween documents. Those'll be six years old soon. Think how much Linux has improved since then. I'm sure Microsoft's internal memos are lot more interesting now. (Probably something along the lines of oh shit...oh shit...oh shit) Wow, to be a fly on the wall of Ballmer's office...
My Grandpa used to tell me about how, back in the day, rival companies would pay thugs to form a mob and go bustin' up each others' patents with nuthin' but axe handles and gumption...
Write a poem and copyright it. Have it embroidered on the front of your tuxedo so it shows up in the wedding photos. Then, offer the photograhper the opportunity to cross-license the poem with the pictures. He would have to go for it, because his pictures include your copyright. If he didn't, you could sue him for selling your poem without a license.
I would eliminate the dependencies wherever possible, streamline the time constraints, and minimize CPU and memory usage. A general ad-hoc ponzi algorithm can be used to substitute for the more complex traveling salesman problem. If the time required to complete each job is increasing, consider reducing the number of jobs or adding nodes. This can help avoid the CSP. OpenPBS is good, but for radio, consider OpenNPR. Yahoo! Terms of Service. Funding is voluntary and there are no commercials. When I worked at the grocery store, the scheduling was written out on a whiteboard. If this doesn't work, consider porting the whole thing to MS-DOS 6.22 and running it on an old 386.
"Putting power on every stroke (as opposed to every other stroke: breathe in/compress/burn/breathe out) does not make an engine "equivalent to" one with twice the cylinders, in any fashion."
Well, it does actually, because in a steam engine, there is no compression/ignition stroke. The compression occurs in the boiler, the ignition in the firebox, so you can apply power each time the piston moves down rather than every other time. You have twice opportunity to apply power with each revolution and thus can generate twice the energy. Granted, it also requires twice the fuel, but you can make the engine half as big, making the vehicle lighter, and thus, more fuel efficient.
"Steam engines generally have two compression chambers on either end of power piston (in a single cylinder). Thats a far cry from driving a gasoline ICE piston from both ends, when one end is a oil crankcase."
Yes, but by having a straight piston stem passing through packing, with the connecting rod on a crosshead slide at the end of the rod, you could act on both sides of the piston. The point I was making was that doing this with the provided engine would be rather difficult. You figured that out on your own, but not that I was implying it already.
"That would result in oil/water problems that "have to be addressed" in the same sense that putting feathers on your car to enable flight would result in a gravity/lift problem that needed to be addressed."
Actually, given that oil tends to float on water, this can be readily addressed by siphoning the engine oil off the top, and water off the bottom. Bear in mind that a refrigerator is essentially already doing this to separate its lubricant and the freon. Not at all insurmountable. Also, I'm not really sure I understand your "feathers" analogy. Are you suggesting cars CAN fly with this treatment, barring minor modifications?
"How would converting gasoline generator-produced electricity to kinetic energy in a flywheel, back to electrical energy to power a motor to create kinetic energy... "eliminate most mechanical parts"?"
By eliminating the transmission, differential, and driveshafts. Duh. Components which sap energy and are exensive to repair. By my count, a rotating flywheel with an integrated propulsion system is but one moving a part, not dissimilar from a hard disk platter. Also, there have been numerous advances in semiconductors which can be used to control this electrical output without the use of relays. By varying duty cycle rather than resistance, one can regulate the flow of current with very little loss of energy.
"And is replacing a simple driveshaft with 4 energy exchanges (each losing effeciency) and far more complex motors, flywheels, wires and signaling (and OMG, far more "moving parts") a worthy goal?"
I would think so. Fewer moving parts means less to break. Again, the described system has FEWER moving parts. One rotating flywheel is far simpler than an automatic transmission. The system I have described is not new. It has been used on diesel locomotives for years (except for the flywheel part). Also, I only count two energy exchanges. Machanical->electric->mechanical. The flywheel is not part of the drivetrain, but instead functions as an ancillary storage battery to capture energy that would otherwise be lost.
I always wondered why recriprocating engines theoretically required more energy to reverse the direction of the parts. I mean, once the piston passes mid stroke and starts slowing down, it is pulling/pushing on the crank, accelerating (imparting energy to) it. After it passes dead center, I would think that the added rotational energy of the crank would be transfered back to the piston. The kinetic energy thus is transfered back and forth between the engine's flywheel and the pistons. Aside from the usual friction in the rings and bearings, I'm not really sure where the loss is.
The SAE competition in the link requires a four cylinder engine. This kind of rules out other types of power such as steam, fuel cell, and stirling engine. Although, I suppose with enough modification, the provided Briggs and Stratton engine could be converted into a steam engine (not that this is necessarily more efficient). Let's see, new camshaft, a means to adjust the valve cutoff, maybe one of those cool looking fly-ball governors... Since a steam engine can apply power in each cylinder on every revolution, this makes it equivalent to a V-8. If you seal off the crankcase into a separate compartment for each cylinder, you can use both sides of the piston and make the equivalent of a V-16. Of course, details like, how to water from condensing in the oil will have to be addressed.
Also, since the peak horsepower of a car is rarely needed except in rapid acceleration, I would think that the key to reducing engine size, and thus, improving efficiency would be to use a small engine with some kind of storage system. Since batteries are bad for the environment, maybe two flywheels rotating in opposite directions (to cancel out precession) under the floor can be used, along with an electric motor/generator to transfer power to/from them. Extra power generated by the engines, as well as from braking, can be used to accelerate the flywheels. This would also improve handling because the gyroscopic effects would keep the car perfectly level on fast turns.
Also, I would think that the car would be cheaper to engineer and produce if you could eliminate most of the mechanical parts. How about a gasoline fired generator, a flywheel battery, and an electric motor on each axle?
Hey, this means that Longhorn would likely get pushed back as well (if it ships at all). This gives us an extra month to make Linux a mainstream desktop OS before the NGSCB DRM (the RIAA's wet dream) ensures Microsoft forevermore. Hurry people!!
Like you said, because they call the shots. The market ebbs and flows based on what these guys say. They don't so much report on reality as they create it. If they say something about software, people listen because people listen.
Slashdot Mirror
People have been travelling great distances without gasoline since prehistoric times.
Hell, Columbus crossed the Atlantic Ocean without it.
A friend of mine worked in a factory that made liquid soap. She ran a bottling machine. She said there would be batches of hundreds of bottles at a time. Each batch would have a different label, and would sell at a different price in the store. But they were filling them with the same slop from the same tank.
Microsoft has a new news site similar to Google news. To find it, type "Microsoft News" into Google.
Peter Gabriel was quoted as saying, "I'd like to hit the RIAA with a SLEDGE-HAMMER dunt-duh. After all, I've kicked the RIAA habit, (kicked the habit, whoo)"
Presumably by checking the address against a database of people who've paid the tax.
Does this mean that the Japanese government is going to take up wardriving to look for violators?
I think it is interesting that, Windows running on a 2 CPU machine requires a 2 CPU license, but, say, 5 instances of VMWare running on a single CPU, each hosting an instance of Windows, requires five licenses. (Six if the instances of VMWare are themselves running on Windows)
Also, what if there was a VMWare-like program that simulated a SMP machine? Would that require a multiple CPU license to run Windows? Even if this program that emulated a SMP machine was running on a single CPU?
If artistic black and white is your thing, consider picking up an old security camera and a video input card. Sure, the focus is terrible, there is no sound, the contrast sucks, and it is real grainy, but this just adds to the consuming intensity of your work. No?
Two years old and we're just now seeing it.
Gotta wonder what they are saying now. Think about the original Halloween documents. Those'll be six years old soon. Think how much Linux has improved since then. I'm sure Microsoft's internal memos are lot more interesting now. (Probably something along the lines of oh shit...oh shit...oh shit) Wow, to be a fly on the wall of Ballmer's office...
"marking the first time AMD's chips have been used in a tablet"
Prior to this, they were either injected or used in suppository form.
Microsoft made a statement today reminding everyone that Windows Server 2003 can handle as many as 32 processors, at the same time even.
When shown the report about Linux running on 1024 processors, Gates purportedly responded, "32 processors ought to be enough for anybody."
Will they eb covering the math competition?
Here is how to tell if something is a sport:
You can buy shoes specifically designed to be worn while doing it.
Otherwise it is not a sport.
If someone starts making a pair of shoes with an integrated slide rule, then math will be a sport. Until then, it's just a hobby.
Lsat Psot!!!
My Grandpa used to tell me about how, back in the day, rival companies would pay thugs to form a mob and go bustin' up each others' patents with nuthin' but axe handles and gumption...
Maybe that's the solution.
Write a poem and copyright it. Have it embroidered on the front of your tuxedo so it shows up in the wedding photos. Then, offer the photograhper the opportunity to cross-license the poem with the pictures. He would have to go for it, because his pictures include your copyright. If he didn't, you could sue him for selling your poem without a license.
TROLL? Yikes...
Well let's see here.
"Putting power on every stroke (as opposed to every other stroke: breathe in/compress/burn/breathe out) does not make an engine "equivalent to" one with twice the cylinders, in any fashion."
Well, it does actually, because in a steam engine, there is no compression/ignition stroke. The compression occurs in the boiler, the ignition in the firebox, so you can apply power each time the piston moves down rather than every other time. You have twice opportunity to apply power with each revolution and thus can generate twice the energy. Granted, it also requires twice the fuel, but you can make the engine half as big, making the vehicle lighter, and thus, more fuel efficient.
"Steam engines generally have two compression chambers on either end of power piston (in a single cylinder). Thats a far cry from driving a gasoline ICE piston from both ends, when one end is a oil crankcase."
Yes, but by having a straight piston stem passing through packing, with the connecting rod on a crosshead slide at the end of the rod, you could act on both sides of the piston. The point I was making was that doing this with the provided engine would be rather difficult. You figured that out on your own, but not that I was implying it already.
"That would result in oil/water problems that "have to be addressed" in the same sense that putting feathers on your car to enable flight would result in a gravity/lift problem that needed to be addressed."
Actually, given that oil tends to float on water, this can be readily addressed by siphoning the engine oil off the top, and water off the bottom. Bear in mind that a refrigerator is essentially already doing this to separate its lubricant and the freon. Not at all insurmountable. Also, I'm not really sure I understand your "feathers" analogy. Are you suggesting cars CAN fly with this treatment, barring minor modifications?
"How would converting gasoline generator-produced electricity to kinetic energy in a flywheel, back to electrical energy to power a motor to create kinetic energy... "eliminate most mechanical parts"?"
By eliminating the transmission, differential, and driveshafts. Duh. Components which sap energy and are exensive to repair. By my count, a rotating flywheel with an integrated propulsion system is but one moving a part, not dissimilar from a hard disk platter. Also, there have been numerous advances in semiconductors which can be used to control this electrical output without the use of relays. By varying duty cycle rather than resistance, one can regulate the flow of current with very little loss of energy.
"And is replacing a simple driveshaft with 4 energy exchanges (each losing effeciency) and far more complex motors, flywheels, wires and signaling (and OMG, far more "moving parts") a worthy goal?"
I would think so. Fewer moving parts means less to break. Again, the described system has FEWER moving parts. One rotating flywheel is far simpler than an automatic transmission. The system I have described is not new. It has been used on diesel locomotives for years (except for the flywheel part). Also, I only count two energy exchanges. Machanical->electric->mechanical. The flywheel is not part of the drivetrain, but instead functions as an ancillary storage battery to capture energy that would otherwise be lost.
I always wondered why recriprocating engines theoretically required more energy to reverse the direction of the parts. I mean, once the piston passes mid stroke and starts slowing down, it is pulling/pushing on the crank, accelerating (imparting energy to) it. After it passes dead center, I would think that the added rotational energy of the crank would be transfered back to the piston. The kinetic energy thus is transfered back and forth between the engine's flywheel and the pistons. Aside from the usual friction in the rings and bearings, I'm not really sure where the loss is.
The SAE competition in the link requires a four cylinder engine. This kind of rules out other types of power such as steam, fuel cell, and stirling engine. Although, I suppose with enough modification, the provided Briggs and Stratton engine could be converted into a steam engine (not that this is necessarily more efficient). Let's see, new camshaft, a means to adjust the valve cutoff, maybe one of those cool looking fly-ball governors... Since a steam engine can apply power in each cylinder on every revolution, this makes it equivalent to a V-8. If you seal off the crankcase into a separate compartment for each cylinder, you can use both sides of the piston and make the equivalent of a V-16. Of course, details like, how to water from condensing in the oil will have to be addressed.
Also, since the peak horsepower of a car is rarely needed except in rapid acceleration, I would think that the key to reducing engine size, and thus, improving efficiency would be to use a small engine with some kind of storage system. Since batteries are bad for the environment, maybe two flywheels rotating in opposite directions (to cancel out precession) under the floor can be used, along with an electric motor/generator to transfer power to/from them. Extra power generated by the engines, as well as from braking, can be used to accelerate the flywheels. This would also improve handling because the gyroscopic effects would keep the car perfectly level on fast turns.
Also, I would think that the car would be cheaper to engineer and produce if you could eliminate most of the mechanical parts. How about a gasoline fired generator, a flywheel battery, and an electric motor on each axle?
Microsoft announced today that they are launching a competing Whois database, Microsoft Owner.
Microsoft Owner features an innovative, user-friendly interface that leverages off of the Microsoft setup Wizards.
To use:
click on icon for Microsoft Owner.
Next->Next->Please enter the domain name
Let's see. How about... www.google.com
Next->Next->Reboot
login->Next->done
www.google.com is Google!
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=824973
Hey, this means that Longhorn would likely get pushed back as well (if it ships at all). This gives us an extra month to make Linux a mainstream desktop OS before the NGSCB DRM (the RIAA's wet dream) ensures Microsoft forevermore. Hurry people!!
Like you said, because they call the shots. The market ebbs and flows based on what these guys say. They don't so much report on reality as they create it. If they say something about software, people listen because people listen.