You're wrong on just about everything you stated. And that's the problem!
Stealing is taking anything to which you have no rights to take. Fact is, if you copied a CD and gave it to a friend, as a result, you stole money directly from the pocket of the artist. Ya, I understand that there are principaled exceptions. Just the same, theft is theft. The artist suffers and you gain. That's theft.
Now then, the fact that you're a complete idiot probably explains why have no morales and can't figure out that you're a loser stealing stuff from others.
I too would love to have a definition of "measurement", especially as it relates to quantum physics. Is the definition the same across all fields of physics?
Nope, your grandparents definition much more likely means you took something to which you have no rights to take. That's stealing. People who do this with music is just as much a theif as anyone that steals a CD from a store. The only difference is that it's the artist and not the store that is harmed.
No, but the stories are not hard to come by. Seems some don't like the extra weight attached to their batteries. So, they remove their "protection" and soon find that instead of the high load from their motor causing the battery to cut off, the battery either boils up and is finished or simply catches on fire.
Most good lion packs will have more than just temp monitoring. Even many cell phone packs have stuff in place to ensure proper discharge and recharge rates. In fact, many packs can not be safely charged without them. Furthermore, if you are using these packs for purposes other than what they were designed (r/c planes, for example), and you are not using a pack with good "stuff" in place to monitor discharge rates, it's a fairly safe bet you'll have an r/c plane on fire.
You're being redundant. The last two are the same thing. Copying it is the same thing as stealing. Insist that the law has different definitions to fit specific classifications, but it's still theft.
This is like saying, I killed that old lady because she was going to die anyways. It's not murder. Ya, bad example but theft is theft.
People only jump on this train so they can attempt to morally justify their theft and not feel guilty about it. Theft is theft. If you're taking music that you should of paid for and didn't, you're a friggen theif! In this case, you're attempting to justify theft by saying only "students" steal music. That's not true. And, I can tell you, there are plenty of students that are driving nice cars with high end audio equipment, money for dates, nice food, and beer, but no money for their stolen music. Ya, that certainly sounds justified.
But I don't believe that stop and go driving is "ideal" for any kind of car.
I understand what you're saying, but I think you missed the point. If you can do the vast majority of your stop-n-go driving on batteries, it's a win for your pocket book AND the environment. Furthermore, making the electric motor push you in stop-n-go traffic avoids serious wear-n-tear associated with ICE engines. Thusly, another win. In otherwords, it's an ideal driving condition of hybrid cars. I'm not sure how you could think of it as anything else.
If you ask someone how they use their car, 90% will be city driving, but they think of the once or twice a year that they take a road trip and say they use a lot of highway miles.
Not in America. And that's the reason why the engineer was claiming that, on average, American's are going to get about half the effeciency, especially when you consider that most Americans are going to drive past ideal criuse speeds.
Actually, IIRC (and it may be wrong), but the engineer clearly spoke of and demostrated a car running off of batteries until it hit double digits (10 - 15 MPH).
Maybe since these were foriegn cars, they function a little differently? I dunno. At any rate, it was clear that for slow stop-n-go traffic, the engine isn't used unless it needs to recharge the batteries or you exceeded 10-15 (I'm thinking it's the later in the range).
I wish I could remember more of the details. The engineer that was interviewed was a Japanese engineer working for one of the car makers actually making hybrid cars.
Not that I doubting your information as it relates to some cars, but I sure that an engineer working on the dang things for a living knows what he's talking about.
Avoid tapping on the brake unnecessarily, anticipate the conditions ahead and lower your speed appropriately; when you see the light turn red or heavy traffic ahead, turn off the cruise control and coast. Obviously, if you have to hit the brake because someone darts in front of you, that takes precedence over MPG.
I thought most modern hybrids charged the batteries when you applied the brakes??? Seems like charging the batteries for "free" would be high on the list.
Some number of years back, the American car industry decided to start making more diesel cars. They were well accepted by the public; well, initial interest anyways. The oil companies got wind of this and started raising prices on diesel fuel. It pissed off the truck drivers bad but it didn't make the prices go down. The masses soon fell out of love with the idea of cheaper gas bills by means of diesel engines. Shortly after diesel cars sales went back down, the price for diesel fuel also went down.
Until our governments stops allowing companies to buy-off politicians in America, diesels are not going to be a popular option here in the states.
Actually, I just watched a show which had one an engineer talking about hybrids. They claim that stop-and-go is one of the ideal operating conditions for hybrids. The reason is that it's running off of batteries and not using gas. Then, once you get out of the stop-n-go, the batteries get recharged. That sure seems to make sense to me. Best of all, he argued that long distance highway driving, typical in America, would provide for some of the worst mileage you can get from a Hybrid as it will mostly be running off of it's ICE. Worse, most Americas tend to drive faster than cruise speeds, further increasing the load on the ICE. Again, that seems to make sense to me.
It seems different countries experience different traffic patterns. In Japan, most traffic is stop-n-go with frequent stops and short trips where cruise speeds are in use. In such cases, hybrids get near ideal performance. Here, in America, while we do have lots of stop-n-go traffic, its ratio is greatly reduced compared to the amount of long distance cruising speed or faster driving. In other words, in America, we wind up disproportionally running off of the gas motor more than the electric motor. In countries like Japan, they are able to run mostly off of their electric motors. The show said you should expect something like twice the effeciency in countries like Japan compared to what most American's will see.
Savings and environmental friendliness are simply easier to realize in very cramped countries like Japan.
I guess if you have to drive in New York every day, it might be worth talking about, but I have a hard time seeing hybrids being accepted as swankie enough for your typical in-city New Yorker.
I've lost data many times wtih ext2. But, keep in mind, I've been using Linux for a very long time (pre-1.0-days) and when ext(2) was the norm and I often ran bleeding edge kernels. So, that's probably heavily biased. I've not used ext3 enough to of lost data. I have run reiserfs extensively. I have lost data several times, without crashing. They were filesystem bugs. I have also lost data from crashing with reiserfs. I've not been impressed with reisferfs's stability or reliability. I think ext was more reliable but is of course, less complex. Just the same, I've been shifting more and more work to XFS over the last couple of years. I have yet to lose any data. XFS is fast, stable, and reliable. Its tool chain/utility support is awesome. It is, by far, one of the most mature FS available on Linux.
I have not used JFS because, in my opinion, it's just now maturing and it's utilities are somewhat lacking (last I checked). In otherwords, if you get into data trouble with JFS, AFAIK, you're pretty much in trouble.
Like most of the FS on Linux each specialize and have various pros and cons. There is no best FS on Linux. Think hard about what your goals are and choose accordingly.
What the hell?!? What is wrong with the mods these days? I can't, in my wildest imagination, figure out what drug you have to take to consider the above to be flamebait.
All of the files systems faired fairly well when finding 10,000 files in a single directory, the only exception being XFS which took twice as long.
I'm surprised that XFS did so poorly here. I do know they had a bug one point in time, which may reflect such a score, however, I thought it had long been addressed. Worse, I thought I remembered reading that XFS used a btree to track file and directory names. Please correct as needed. If this is true, it would appear to be a bug rather than normal performance. Any XFS experts care to fill in the blanks here?
I should also offer than XFS's big claims are stability, reliability, big and huge file support, speed when accessing big and huge files, and excellent concurrent file access abilities, which is why SCSI is the preferred media for XFS. Basically, if you plan on managing big and huge files or medium to huge files with large amounts of concurrent activity via SCSI, then XFS should be one of your target FS.
Then, you have excellent snapshot, backup and recovery utilities as well as quota and realtime access support. All of which, make XFS an excellent journalled FS.
Robot Wars has got to go. It's the only show I've seen that has one part Trailer Trasher Westlers, two parts WWF promotion and two parts dorky remote controlled robots.
IMO, the show is too stupid for techies and too highbrow for WWF fans. Obviously, I must be missing the point because I just can't understand how that show has stayed on for so long.
My skillset, I believe, has contributed to society, if only in a minor way. I was one of the primary developers in implementing the Lone Star Card program which provided federal food and cash assistance programs, replacing food stamps. This greatly reduced fraud and increased the quality of living for many people requiring federal assistance. All of which, is really completely beside the point. The whole point, which people seem happy to ignore because they're so selfishly concerned and focused on sports, is that if people put a higher priority on things that mattered (higher education), it improves the chances that someone might be able to contriubte something back to our society or humanity. As such, real gems of potential, in many school systems are getting less than ideal educations at the expense of sports. Accordingly, the potential loss for all of us is greater than should be. All it takes is for us to lose out on one real gem of a person for us all to of lost. And the loss could potentially be big.
The whole point of this thread was not targeted at you or even me. The point is, that there are many very smart kids out there that are getting significantly lessor educations, which in turn, greatly reduces the chances that they'll miss the window of potential for themselves and all of us. A missed potential, in some cases, can be directly associated with lost and/or funneled money into sports activities which is never going to better man kind or society. In other words, in the grand scheme of things, sports are worthless when you consider the games can still be played without all the money being wasted on them. The same is not true about out children's education.
This making sense?
are you an armchair/desktop hypocrite
In ths case, for me to be a hypocrite, I would have to be donating or even encouraging donating, at the expense of education funds, to sports programs. Which, I think means you completely missed the boat. So, even if you completely miss the boat, after this post, I can't be considered a hypocrite.
holier than thou Slashdot posters
I think most people have the right to look down their nose at you after that statement. Simple fact is, it's not unreasonable to want our nation's children to have a good education. The simple fact that you would consider that to be "holier than thou", says a lot about the state of our society. How pethetic is that?
Fair enough. But, to me, things that matter are things that effect all of us. Things that revolve around improving the limited life we have. Having fun is having fun and you don't have to have sports to do that. I think you'd be very hard pressed to find anyone that would compare football with feeding the masses of humanity with a straight face.
The fact that I have to point this out, might be a good indication that you might want to evaluate some things in your life. After all, in the grand scheme of things, sports activities don't mean a dang thing.
Stop and think about that for a second. Cure cancer of made a touchdown? Made faster/cheaper transportation for the world or made goal? See the difference here? On one side, you have something that matters to ALL man kind and on the otherside, you have something that is pretty silly and doesn't matter in the least. You really prepared to argue that sports equates to something that matters to human beings? I'm sure the starving people in Africa can't wait to clap at the intelligence of that position. "Moomy, I'm so hungry but I don't care because that man made a touchdown." Ya, I'm sure those words are spoken often.
LOL.
Shesh. You're confusing what's important TO YOU versus what's important to man kind. After all, sports don't mean a dang thing at all. Period. If you still can't see what I'm talking about, then I can only say, you need serious help in evaluating your life. Another way of thinking about it is, people like you are the reason why more advances are not being found. I'm sure that will piss you off, but seriously, think about it. What if, people put more energy into things that mattered versus things for self gratification and self enjoyment? What if...
Note that if you don't get elected, or at least come really close, it is a sign that you don't fit into the community and should move someplace where you fit in
LOL. That's insane. In otherwords, if you can't change US culture, move?
Meanwhile, back in reality, the chances of being able to get people to ignore primative comfort feelings associated with their father so that they could encourage their child's education and actually spend time with their kids, isn't going to happen. Beyond that, I have no idea what moving has to do with human nature.
Did you notice how protective some of the posters became. Oh no! He's telling the truth about sports. People might find out that it doesn't matter one bit. Worse, they might learn that the, "teaches life lessons", party line is complete crap.
I guess it might actually hurt some people's egos to come face to face with the fact that they've wasted so much time by placing importance on something that is a play-time-game (doesn't matter one bit in the grand scheme of things).
If sports is bringing in so much money for these schooles, how come it's not giving back to education? How come all these schools don't have first rate computer and science labs? How come public schools, all across the US, still have book and instruction aid shortages. Something tells me, most of these people are all wet in their thinking. Best I can tell, on average, they are paying back the money they diverted from actual educational budgets. Then, about the time it's paid back, they decide it's time for new facilities and equipment.
Slashdot Mirror
Nope!
You're wrong on just about everything you stated. And that's the problem!
Stealing is taking anything to which you have no rights to take. Fact is, if you copied a CD and gave it to a friend, as a result, you stole money directly from the pocket of the artist. Ya, I understand that there are principaled exceptions. Just the same, theft is theft. The artist suffers and you gain. That's theft.
Now then, the fact that you're a complete idiot probably explains why have no morales and can't figure out that you're a loser stealing stuff from others.
I too would love to have a definition of "measurement", especially as it relates to quantum physics. Is the definition the same across all fields of physics?
Nope, your grandparents definition much more likely means you took something to which you have no rights to take. That's stealing. People who do this with music is just as much a theif as anyone that steals a CD from a store. The only difference is that it's the artist and not the store that is harmed.
No, but the stories are not hard to come by. Seems some don't like the extra weight attached to their batteries. So, they remove their "protection" and soon find that instead of the high load from their motor causing the battery to cut off, the battery either boils up and is finished or simply catches on fire.
Wow! Serious loser mods don't know the difference between someone with an opinion and someone trolling. That's pretty sad.
Most good lion packs will have more than just temp monitoring. Even many cell phone packs have stuff in place to ensure proper discharge and recharge rates. In fact, many packs can not be safely charged without them. Furthermore, if you are using these packs for purposes other than what they were designed (r/c planes, for example), and you are not using a pack with good "stuff" in place to monitor discharge rates, it's a fairly safe bet you'll have an r/c plane on fire.
No, there are 3 ways: Buy it, Steal It or Copy It
You're being redundant. The last two are the same thing. Copying it is the same thing as stealing. Insist that the law has different definitions to fit specific classifications, but it's still theft.
This is like saying, I killed that old lady because she was going to die anyways. It's not murder. Ya, bad example but theft is theft.
People only jump on this train so they can attempt to morally justify their theft and not feel guilty about it. Theft is theft. If you're taking music that you should of paid for and didn't, you're a friggen theif! In this case, you're attempting to justify theft by saying only "students" steal music. That's not true. And, I can tell you, there are plenty of students that are driving nice cars with high end audio equipment, money for dates, nice food, and beer, but no money for their stolen music. Ya, that certainly sounds justified.
But I don't believe that stop and go driving is "ideal" for any kind of car.
I understand what you're saying, but I think you missed the point. If you can do the vast majority of your stop-n-go driving on batteries, it's a win for your pocket book AND the environment. Furthermore, making the electric motor push you in stop-n-go traffic avoids serious wear-n-tear associated with ICE engines. Thusly, another win. In otherwords, it's an ideal driving condition of hybrid cars. I'm not sure how you could think of it as anything else.
If you ask someone how they use their car, 90% will be city driving, but they think of the once or twice a year that they take a road trip and say they use a lot of highway miles.
Not in America. And that's the reason why the engineer was claiming that, on average, American's are going to get about half the effeciency, especially when you consider that most Americans are going to drive past ideal criuse speeds.
Actually, IIRC (and it may be wrong), but the engineer clearly spoke of and demostrated a car running off of batteries until it hit double digits (10 - 15 MPH).
Maybe since these were foriegn cars, they function a little differently? I dunno. At any rate, it was clear that for slow stop-n-go traffic, the engine isn't used unless it needs to recharge the batteries or you exceeded 10-15 (I'm thinking it's the later in the range).
I wish I could remember more of the details. The engineer that was interviewed was a Japanese engineer working for one of the car makers actually making hybrid cars.
Not that I doubting your information as it relates to some cars, but I sure that an engineer working on the dang things for a living knows what he's talking about.
Avoid tapping on the brake unnecessarily, anticipate the conditions ahead and lower your speed appropriately; when you see the light turn red or heavy traffic ahead, turn off the cruise control and coast. Obviously, if you have to hit the brake because someone darts in front of you, that takes precedence over MPG.
I thought most modern hybrids charged the batteries when you applied the brakes??? Seems like charging the batteries for "free" would be high on the list.
Some number of years back, the American car industry decided to start making more diesel cars. They were well accepted by the public; well, initial interest anyways. The oil companies got wind of this and started raising prices on diesel fuel. It pissed off the truck drivers bad but it didn't make the prices go down. The masses soon fell out of love with the idea of cheaper gas bills by means of diesel engines. Shortly after diesel cars sales went back down, the price for diesel fuel also went down.
Until our governments stops allowing companies to buy-off politicians in America, diesels are not going to be a popular option here in the states.
Actually, I just watched a show which had one an engineer talking about hybrids. They claim that stop-and-go is one of the ideal operating conditions for hybrids. The reason is that it's running off of batteries and not using gas. Then, once you get out of the stop-n-go, the batteries get recharged. That sure seems to make sense to me. Best of all, he argued that long distance highway driving, typical in America, would provide for some of the worst mileage you can get from a Hybrid as it will mostly be running off of it's ICE. Worse, most Americas tend to drive faster than cruise speeds, further increasing the load on the ICE. Again, that seems to make sense to me.
that talked about this...
It seems different countries experience different traffic patterns. In Japan, most traffic is stop-n-go with frequent stops and short trips where cruise speeds are in use. In such cases, hybrids get near ideal performance. Here, in America, while we do have lots of stop-n-go traffic, its ratio is greatly reduced compared to the amount of long distance cruising speed or faster driving. In other words, in America, we wind up disproportionally running off of the gas motor more than the electric motor. In countries like Japan, they are able to run mostly off of their electric motors. The show said you should expect something like twice the effeciency in countries like Japan compared to what most American's will see.
Savings and environmental friendliness are simply easier to realize in very cramped countries like Japan.
I guess if you have to drive in New York every day, it might be worth talking about, but I have a hard time seeing hybrids being accepted as swankie enough for your typical in-city New Yorker.
I've lost data many times wtih ext2. But, keep in mind, I've been using Linux for a very long time (pre-1.0-days) and when ext(2) was the norm and I often ran bleeding edge kernels. So, that's probably heavily biased. I've not used ext3 enough to of lost data. I have run reiserfs extensively. I have lost data several times, without crashing. They were filesystem bugs. I have also lost data from crashing with reiserfs. I've not been impressed with reisferfs's stability or reliability. I think ext was more reliable but is of course, less complex. Just the same, I've been shifting more and more work to XFS over the last couple of years. I have yet to lose any data. XFS is fast, stable, and reliable. Its tool chain/utility support is awesome. It is, by far, one of the most mature FS available on Linux.
I have not used JFS because, in my opinion, it's just now maturing and it's utilities are somewhat lacking (last I checked). In otherwords, if you get into data trouble with JFS, AFAIK, you're pretty much in trouble.
Like most of the FS on Linux each specialize and have various pros and cons. There is no best FS on Linux. Think hard about what your goals are and choose accordingly.
Flamebait??!?!
What the hell?!? What is wrong with the mods these days? I can't, in my wildest imagination, figure out what drug you have to take to consider the above to be flamebait.
This flamebait? Sure, but the parent? Come on...
All of the files systems faired fairly well when finding 10,000 files in a single directory, the only exception being XFS which took twice as long.
I'm surprised that XFS did so poorly here. I do know they had a bug one point in time, which may reflect such a score, however, I thought it had long been addressed. Worse, I thought I remembered reading that XFS used a btree to track file and directory names. Please correct as needed. If this is true, it would appear to be a bug rather than normal performance. Any XFS experts care to fill in the blanks here?
I should also offer than XFS's big claims are stability, reliability, big and huge file support, speed when accessing big and huge files, and excellent concurrent file access abilities, which is why SCSI is the preferred media for XFS. Basically, if you plan on managing big and huge files or medium to huge files with large amounts of concurrent activity via SCSI, then XFS should be one of your target FS.
Then, you have excellent snapshot, backup and recovery utilities as well as quota and realtime access support. All of which, make XFS an excellent journalled FS.
BTW, when and what channel with Family Guy be appearing?
Robot Wars has got to go. It's the only show I've seen that has one part Trailer Trasher Westlers, two parts WWF promotion and two parts dorky remote controlled robots.
IMO, the show is too stupid for techies and too highbrow for WWF fans. Obviously, I must be missing the point because I just can't understand how that show has stayed on for so long.
I agree. Anyone that's even seen a very small segment from CFH can clearly see that the show is not scripted.
My skillset, I believe, has contributed to society, if only in a minor way. I was one of the primary developers in implementing the Lone Star Card program which provided federal food and cash assistance programs, replacing food stamps. This greatly reduced fraud and increased the quality of living for many people requiring federal assistance. All of which, is really completely beside the point. The whole point, which people seem happy to ignore because they're so selfishly concerned and focused on sports, is that if people put a higher priority on things that mattered (higher education), it improves the chances that someone might be able to contriubte something back to our society or humanity. As such, real gems of potential, in many school systems are getting less than ideal educations at the expense of sports. Accordingly, the potential loss for all of us is greater than should be. All it takes is for us to lose out on one real gem of a person for us all to of lost. And the loss could potentially be big.
The whole point of this thread was not targeted at you or even me. The point is, that there are many very smart kids out there that are getting significantly lessor educations, which in turn, greatly reduces the chances that they'll miss the window of potential for themselves and all of us. A missed potential, in some cases, can be directly associated with lost and/or funneled money into sports activities which is never going to better man kind or society. In other words, in the grand scheme of things, sports are worthless when you consider the games can still be played without all the money being wasted on them. The same is not true about out children's education.
This making sense?
are you an armchair/desktop hypocrite
In ths case, for me to be a hypocrite, I would have to be donating or even encouraging donating, at the expense of education funds, to sports programs. Which, I think means you completely missed the boat. So, even if you completely miss the boat, after this post, I can't be considered a hypocrite.
holier than thou Slashdot posters
I think most people have the right to look down their nose at you after that statement. Simple fact is, it's not unreasonable to want our nation's children to have a good education. The simple fact that you would consider that to be "holier than thou", says a lot about the state of our society. How pethetic is that?
Well, you have my pitty.
I don't think you've grasped what I'm talking about but I think it's pretty clear we won't see eye to eye. Fair enough.
Fair enough. But, to me, things that matter are things that effect all of us. Things that revolve around improving the limited life we have. Having fun is having fun and you don't have to have sports to do that. I think you'd be very hard pressed to find anyone that would compare football with feeding the masses of humanity with a straight face.
The fact that I have to point this out, might be a good indication that you might want to evaluate some things in your life. After all, in the grand scheme of things, sports activities don't mean a dang thing.
Stop and think about that for a second. Cure cancer of made a touchdown? Made faster/cheaper transportation for the world or made goal? See the difference here? On one side, you have something that matters to ALL man kind and on the otherside, you have something that is pretty silly and doesn't matter in the least. You really prepared to argue that sports equates to something that matters to human beings? I'm sure the starving people in Africa can't wait to clap at the intelligence of that position. "Moomy, I'm so hungry but I don't care because that man made a touchdown." Ya, I'm sure those words are spoken often.
LOL.
Shesh. You're confusing what's important TO YOU versus what's important to man kind. After all, sports don't mean a dang thing at all. Period. If you still can't see what I'm talking about, then I can only say, you need serious help in evaluating your life. Another way of thinking about it is, people like you are the reason why more advances are not being found. I'm sure that will piss you off, but seriously, think about it. What if, people put more energy into things that mattered versus things for self gratification and self enjoyment? What if...
Note that if you don't get elected, or at least come really close, it is a sign that you don't fit into the community and should move someplace where you fit in
LOL. That's insane. In otherwords, if you can't change US culture, move?
Meanwhile, back in reality, the chances of being able to get people to ignore primative comfort feelings associated with their father so that they could encourage their child's education and actually spend time with their kids, isn't going to happen. Beyond that, I have no idea what moving has to do with human nature.
I couldn't agree more.
Did you notice how protective some of the posters became. Oh no! He's telling the truth about sports. People might find out that it doesn't matter one bit. Worse, they might learn that the, "teaches life lessons", party line is complete crap.
I guess it might actually hurt some people's egos to come face to face with the fact that they've wasted so much time by placing importance on something that is a play-time-game (doesn't matter one bit in the grand scheme of things).
If sports is bringing in so much money for these schooles, how come it's not giving back to education? How come all these schools don't have first rate computer and science labs? How come public schools, all across the US, still have book and instruction aid shortages. Something tells me, most of these people are all wet in their thinking. Best I can tell, on average, they are paying back the money they diverted from actual educational budgets. Then, about the time it's paid back, they decide it's time for new facilities and equipment.
Cheers!