That was back when if you could kill the driver they couldn't sue. Now we let the relatives sue on the dead's behalf so that strategy doesn't work any more.
don't have a citation for you, but yes it is,, in the mid 90's it was designed to go into the passenger seat, now they are mostly designed to go down (FE-RWD), to separate (FE-AWS), or laydown (FE-FWD). i have no clue what the strategy is for rear wheel drive.
I wonder why my original comment got no points, but your query got two?
Because rather than adding to the conversation, maybe by stating your statement and giving an example of how to fine tune it, you just come in here and try to crap on something someone did without giving any constructive feedback.
Example being i could have just responded "because you're being an ass" but rather i'm giving you feedback that instead of just "being an ass" you could give some insight on not just what you think is wrong but what could be done to improve it.
(yes i know this is an AC, but obviously this one likes to read his words, maybe he can take some constructive criticism and change for the better, well lets hope)
2. If your hangar is stationary at the wheel hub and the living areas are gimballed to rotate around the hangar, how do you seal your living quarters if there's a constantly rotating connection inside the station? It would seem that wherever the two meet will constantly leak air.
That is actually quite simple today. If you think about it the seal only has to prevent leakage for a Differential Pressure of ~13psi. Everyone thinks of the vacuum of space being this harsh constant sucking force, but the reality is it is jsut a void and your own mass is trying to equalize pressure with it. In industrial processes it's normal to have rotating seals that can't leak (think explosive gases) at more than 600+psi differential pressure between internal and external.
makes heavy use of carbon fiber for weight reduction.
Yet somehow it's still 2700 lbs.
I think car manufacturers have lost any sense of what light weight means.
I've got a midget made of steel with a heavy ass cast iron block at ~1500 lbs and a modern much safer miata at 2,100 lbs.. sure neither are electric or have the heavy batteries, BUT there are lithium-ion batteries at around 125wh/kg meaning that 22kwh would be ~400 lbs.
Sorry but i really don't know what the hell they are doing to make modern cars so damn heavy, and the reality is that weight is a huge factor in range, as much if not more important than the aero factors (unless your just horrid at aero designs)
One of the core problems with starbucks is the over roasting of all their beans, this is done to "ensure" consistency between stores. Mix that with enough marketing and a general populous that cares more about being hip and don't know any better, consistency becomes a major factor for them. If one store produced a better quality/tasting drink then you could have fragmentation of the brand name. It's the unification of the brand name that sets them apart from the mom & pop coffee shops, so consistency becomes one of the key factors to ensure that setting apart. Now to do that at a cheap cost the easiest way is to over roast the beans so that it doesn't matter where they are getting them from or the original quality..
While i don't agree with it, and i don't care for their coffee, i can fully understand their strategic decision to do it, and it was and is proving to be a very wise decision.
I had an S80 T6, i will say that is one of the best road trip cars i've ever driven. and overall performance wise it wasn't bad. but it was one of the worst built POS's i've ever seen.
Agreed, by using the same core board/cpu they are bringing the lower end devices up to the same software lifecycle as the high ends.. and just as you said it allow them to avoid fragmentation which is a serious issue to manage.
Agreed, if anything this sounds to me more like streamlining the supply chain and manufacturing by removing component variance. Using the same part a million times is significantly cheaper than using one part for 800k and another for 200k even if the single part used a million times is more expensive.
I'd expect the same result across the board as they roll it out.
Remember that intel had and still has an arm licence, and when they did make their own arm processors the xscale had one of the best power to performance ratios available, while also having very effective frequency scaling and power management..
Even if it was an Apple designed SoC the quality of Intel's foundries are unmatched really, so for the same chip they would have received a higher quality product.
It's my opinion that, yes it would have been better.
It's simple just screw up the global BGP tables and no one will be able to access it. no where did is see where the order required zero impact to anything else.
- take-off stress being particularly high - structural micro-damage to wings being critical
For a helicopter, maybe not so much take off, but landing sure is particularly high stress, and replace wings with rotors as they are serving the same basic function (providing lift).
Which is a fairly nicely done research paper, sure in idle the screen is the most, but under load the CPU dominates, and that is very true even in a lot of newer laptops..
During lower power states and standby states, the comms units, the display, etc. can all consume way more power than the core.
Which is great really, because only a few years ago it was top of the list for power consumption. once it gets to the bottom, then we can start picking up the next heavy hitter to power consumption. It makes sense to work on what is hurting the most, and the CPU was hurting the most, now we can shift focus on to the next big one. Although that doesn't mean the CPU group should slow down, else they will soon be back at the top of that list.
Slashdot Mirror
Seaquest ftw...
Great show, until they went the Alien route, completely killed it.. (like most shows that attempt it)...
But in reality, i'd love to see people start moving under the ocean to both live and work, i think it would be awesome.
While i like with life imitates art, it should NEVER imitate The Onion. If and when it does, someone fucked up somewhere.
The one thing i see you are are missing i the X factor, of bloodline.. it can skew that metric all over the place.
That was back when if you could kill the driver they couldn't sue. Now we let the relatives sue on the dead's behalf so that strategy doesn't work any more.
don't have a citation for you, but yes it is,, in the mid 90's it was designed to go into the passenger seat, now they are mostly designed to go down (FE-RWD), to separate (FE-AWS), or laydown (FE-FWD). i have no clue what the strategy is for rear wheel drive.
(Just don't order McDonald's food!)
Fixed that for you :)
I wonder why my original comment got no points, but your query got two?
Because rather than adding to the conversation, maybe by stating your statement and giving an example of how to fine tune it, you just come in here and try to crap on something someone did without giving any constructive feedback.
Example being i could have just responded "because you're being an ass" but rather i'm giving you feedback that instead of just "being an ass" you could give some insight on not just what you think is wrong but what could be done to improve it.
(yes i know this is an AC, but obviously this one likes to read his words, maybe he can take some constructive criticism and change for the better, well lets hope)
2. If your hangar is stationary at the wheel hub and the living areas are gimballed to rotate around the hangar, how do you seal your living quarters if there's a constantly rotating connection inside the station? It would seem that wherever the two meet will constantly leak air.
That is actually quite simple today. If you think about it the seal only has to prevent leakage for a Differential Pressure of ~13psi. Everyone thinks of the vacuum of space being this harsh constant sucking force, but the reality is it is jsut a void and your own mass is trying to equalize pressure with it. In industrial processes it's normal to have rotating seals that can't leak (think explosive gases) at more than 600+psi differential pressure between internal and external.
According to my sig, you'd get a gold metal. :)
Or better yet, we should just skip the title and base our discussion on the submission's category icon.
That might make moderating/meta-moderating a bit easier, at least we would have less variance in the results.
makes heavy use of carbon fiber for weight reduction.
Yet somehow it's still 2700 lbs.
I think car manufacturers have lost any sense of what light weight means.
I've got a midget made of steel with a heavy ass cast iron block at ~1500 lbs and a modern much safer miata at 2,100 lbs.. sure neither are electric or have the heavy batteries, BUT there are lithium-ion batteries at around 125wh/kg meaning that 22kwh would be ~400 lbs.
Sorry but i really don't know what the hell they are doing to make modern cars so damn heavy, and the reality is that weight is a huge factor in range, as much if not more important than the aero factors (unless your just horrid at aero designs)
There are interesting longitudinal lines across the scorched area - is the composite body laid down in strips?
I can say the answer to that is yes, the shell is made up in a crosshatch
One of the core problems with starbucks is the over roasting of all their beans, this is done to "ensure" consistency between stores. Mix that with enough marketing and a general populous that cares more about being hip and don't know any better, consistency becomes a major factor for them. If one store produced a better quality/tasting drink then you could have fragmentation of the brand name. It's the unification of the brand name that sets them apart from the mom & pop coffee shops, so consistency becomes one of the key factors to ensure that setting apart. Now to do that at a cheap cost the easiest way is to over roast the beans so that it doesn't matter where they are getting them from or the original quality..
While i don't agree with it, and i don't care for their coffee, i can fully understand their strategic decision to do it, and it was and is proving to be a very wise decision.
You do realize the traditional trike design is an extremely unstable platform?
I had an S80 T6, i will say that is one of the best road trip cars i've ever driven. and overall performance wise it wasn't bad. but it was one of the worst built POS's i've ever seen.
that was a Volvo, everything uses the same damn bus
Agreed, by using the same core board/cpu they are bringing the lower end devices up to the same software lifecycle as the high ends.. and just as you said it allow them to avoid fragmentation which is a serious issue to manage.
Agreed, if anything this sounds to me more like streamlining the supply chain and manufacturing by removing component variance. Using the same part a million times is significantly cheaper than using one part for 800k and another for 200k even if the single part used a million times is more expensive.
I'd expect the same result across the board as they roll it out.
Remember that intel had and still has an arm licence, and when they did make their own arm processors the xscale had one of the best power to performance ratios available, while also having very effective frequency scaling and power management..
Even if it was an Apple designed SoC the quality of Intel's foundries are unmatched really, so for the same chip they would have received a higher quality product.
It's my opinion that, yes it would have been better.
It's simple just screw up the global BGP tables and no one will be able to access it. no where did is see where the order required zero impact to anything else.
With margins as small as they are now, you would be surprised how small a $1 million a year shop can be, and still be borderline profitable.
- take-off stress being particularly high
- structural micro-damage to wings being critical
For a helicopter, maybe not so much take off, but landing sure is particularly high stress, and replace wings with rotors as they are serving the same basic function (providing lift).
well a quick google search for "laptop power consumption by component" first link is a PDF
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.87.5604&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Which is a fairly nicely done research paper, sure in idle the screen is the most, but under load the CPU dominates, and that is very true even in a lot of newer laptops..
During lower power states and standby states, the comms units, the display, etc. can all consume way more power than the core.
Which is great really, because only a few years ago it was top of the list for power consumption. once it gets to the bottom, then we can start picking up the next heavy hitter to power consumption. It makes sense to work on what is hurting the most, and the CPU was hurting the most, now we can shift focus on to the next big one. Although that doesn't mean the CPU group should slow down, else they will soon be back at the top of that list.
unless you usually like to go the long way around.
Well this is Lockheed Martin after all.