The situation you describe is no different than the old story of getting flat tire at the only gas station in town when you ask the attendant how much it will be to fix the tire he says "how much do you have?".
The seller sets a price, when the buyer meets it a deal is done. Each tries to get the best deal from the other. If the seller would try to bring buyer desperation into the pricing policy, I don't see anything wrong with the buyer doing what they can to eliminate it as a factor.
Wouldn't you be upset if you stood in line at the store to buy the same bottle of pop as the person in front of you and the cashier said it would cost you more because you look like you have more money?
I know that despite everyone knowing they didn't like what it said, very few people actually read the SOPA bill.
SOPA only applies to foreign sites with foreign name registrars. For sites like this where the US Government can get the name registrar to yank the name or can contact the site owners to tell them to take it down (or else), SOPA isn't needed and indeed wouldn't apply.
SOPA was designed to let the US government block the name resolution of foreign sites when the owners of the site and the foreign name registrars refused to do this. Once that was removed, the only actions left were to block financial transactions to the sites in hopes of defunding them.
Part of the reason Godaddy was for SOPA is because as a US name registrar, they already have to comply with these orders, they likely wanted SOPA to come into effect so this wouldn't keep them at a competitive disadvantage to offshore name registrars who can refuse to comply.
And I found the movie to be lacking too. It was beautiful, some shots were right out of the comic book, amazing.
But it just wasn't all that good.
Face it, art is a matter of taste. Intelligent minds can disagree, one person doesn't have to be deficient to disagree with another on things like this.
Honestly, what did you expect from Zach Snyder? He makes big, dumb, pretty movies. This movie was about all you could expect from him and them maybe some. But it just didn't make the grade. Some stories just don't film well.
Golf GTIs don't get 50mpg. They get 27mpg on the US rating system, the same one the Volt gets 37mpg on.
Perhaps you mean the Golf TDI? The Golf TDI gets 34mpg on the US rating system, the same one the Volt gets 37mpg on.
I think you're greatly confused, you don't understand that the US gallon is smaller and the US measurement system produces much lower mpg figures for the same vehicles.
When measured on the same European system you are referring to, the Volt will get better figures than 37mpg. It won't get 70mpg, that's true.
The Volt doesn't get atrocious gas mileage. And Ford doesn't have a single vehicle in the size range of the Volt which matches it on overall mpg (counting only gas mode), let alone beats it so badly as to call the Volt mpg "atrocious"
As far as I know at this time, in the North American market Ford only has one vehicle in any size range that gets better mpg than the Volt (again, only counting gas mode) and that is the Fusion Hybrid. It tops the Volt by 5% (2mpg). It costs $30,000, about 3/4 what the Volt does.
Yes, you're right about the $20K buying a lot of gas. You will never make your investment on a Volt back in fuel savings. I've done the math many many ways. If you buy a Volt, it has to be beause you want to be able to drive without gas. Otherwise just get a Prius (if hybrids work at SK temps) or a high mpg gas car like Cruze Eco or one of the Hyundais and pocket the savings as gas money.
Ugh, I hate the terms charge depleting and charge sustaining. So confusing. I just use them because they are the official terms.
I messed up, using "charge depleting" where I should have said "charge sustaining" in my "(the car is already in charge depleting mode)" above. The engine is only on in charge sustaining mode and the engine only drives the drivetrain directly in charge sustaining mode.
There is no way you can discharge deeply enough to eliminate the risk of fire. You can only minimize it. The risk of fire is from the chemicals, and they are still dangerous and flammable even when discharged.
Lions (as used in the Volt) are not destroyed if they are discharged completely. It's not good for them, it reduces their lifespan. But doing it once (or a few times) won't end their lives noticeably prematurely.
It doesn't come on to go up steep hills at more than 40mph. You have badly misread this text.
The car slows down if you climb a steep grade at more than 40mph if the electric battery is low. Because of this they have a special "mountain mode" where the battery is not allowed to get that low. It reduces the range of the car by about 1/3rd and that's on top of the fact that you get reduced range climbing hills like any other car.
The gas engine will not come on PERIOD unless the battery runs out or if the temperature gets so very low that the electric car heater is so inefficient that there's little point to driving on battery. This happens at some temp below 10F.
The only time this text mentions the engine coming on and assisting at any speed is when in charge sustaining mode. Charge sustaining mode is the "regular" hybrid mode when the battery is depleted and all the motion is coming from the gas. In this mode it acts like a non-plugin hybrid, all the propulsion comes directly or indirectly from gas.
The initial mode you operate in after a charge up is charge depleting mode. In this mode the gas engine doesn't come on except at very low temperatures as I mentioned above.
I think the source of your confusion may be that the initial reviews indicated the gas engine connects directly to the drivetrain (through the ring gear) to drive the car at highway speeds. But this only happens when the gas engine is already on (the car is already in charge depleting mode). Before this info came out, GM had said (for a while) that the gas engine only ever drove a generator that generated electricity to run the electric motors to drive the wheels. But this turns out not to be efficient (as Toyota also knows, later Priuses get better mpg because they do this more often), so GM made it possible for the gas engine to drive the drivetrain directly. A lot of people got angry about this, mostly for no reason, although GM saying it would work one way and then working another I guess is at least worth mentioning.
But I emphasize again, this only happens in charge sustaining mode, which is the mode the car is in after the battery has been depleted (after the initial 37 miles or so). In charge depleting mode you can press the pedal as hard as you want and the engine never comes on. It'll hit its speed limiter of 85 but the gas engine won't come on. This is what makes the Volt a ER-EV (extended range EV) and not just a regular PHEV. This is unlike any other PHEV out there except for the Fisker Karma.
Yes, the battery must be drained after an accident. But this isn't much different than a gas car which requires the gas tank be drained after an accident. NHTSA in fact drains the gas tanks on gas cars (including the Volt!) BEFORE they wreck them because of the danger of the gasoline.
The draining of the battery is no big deal. It won't toast the battery. In this kind of wreck the battery has sustained damage that means it must be inspected and rebuilt whether it is drained or not. Also, the car is totaled after a wreck of this magnitude anyway, so the additional expense of draining the battery isn't a big deal.
It's is a hybrid. But you can drive between 35 and 40 miles without gas AT FULL SPEED. I have a friend who has one and drives for weeks at at time with no gas. I was with him when he drove up a several mile long grade of about 3-4% at 80 miles an hour on electricity only as part of the 32.5 drive to his house.
I don't know where you get the idea of short distances at low speeds from, but you're wrong. Perhaps you're thinking of the Prius PHEV or something else?
So the statement 'doesn't rely on a big oil corporation to be useful' is accurate.
To have a battery penetration here, you would have to have a side intrusion into the car which extends about 2 feet in from the side of the car. Your side airbags will have gone off, the car likely isn't even drivable.
No one is going to think their car had only small physical damage with this kind of wreck.
And your statements about gas cars are also incorrect. I've followed cars on the highway which clearly were leaking gas. This isn't a fire hazard because it's been more than a few minutes since the wreck? I've seen cars just plain catch fire on the side of the road with no wreck at all.
Neither HDMI graphics cards nor HDMI monitors require HDCP. HDCP is not required on HDMI.
I ran HDMI from my DirecTV receiver to my Dell display (DVI input) for years. No HDCP required nor used (and the display didn't support it!).
There is nothing in the system that requires HDCP except the signal transmitting device. After the HDMI connection is set up, the transmitter knows whether it has active HDCP or not. The transmitter may then refuse to transmit video if the video it is to send is marked as not transportable over digital connections that don't use HDCP. For example an Xbox 360 will play games but not media content over a non-HDCP HDMI connection. A PS3 won't show anything at all over HDMI if there is no HDCP.
There is absolutely nothing enforced by the monitor vis-a-vis HDCP. If the sender sends video and monitor understands the format and encryption it displays it. It is completely up to the sender to decide what should and should not be displayed.
The rules for sending content over DVI are exactly the same as those over HDMI. If the content is marked as not showable over non-encrypted digital connections it cannot be shown over any non-encrypted digital connections, whether HDMI, DVI, MiniDP, etc.
Would it be too big an imposition to become informed about the facts before projecting hate?
Mini DisplayPort is not higher bandwidth than DVI. Mini DP has perhaps 10-15% better (usable) bandwidth than single-link DVI. But dual-link DVI has 100% better bandwidth than single-link DVI.
All of them are affected by cable length, but at any given cable length, dual-link DVI supports almost double the resolution as Mini DP.
Mini DP's connector is not less likely to fall out than DVI, DVI's connector has screws to hold it in. MiniDP does not.
Thunderbolt is not Mini DP. It is nice that Thunderbolt can situated in the same connector as MiniDP and that Thunderbolt can be used for other things. Thunderbolt however is not cost-effective. It requires active cables with signal conditioning in each end. These cables are currently $75 and are not likely to drop to the reasonable prices of USB 3.0 cables ever. And at longer cable lengths you must by optical cables and those will cost even more since the cable has the optical transceivers in it.
No, you can also play Blu-ray movies with an HDCP compliant monitor, video card and DVI cable. Or you can do it with VGA. Or you can do it on a integrated display (like a laptop). You just can't do it with non-HDCP digital video out whether HDMI or DVI (well, not at full res you can't, it must be downsampled to 960x540).
That makes no sense at all. A closed loop won't get rid of heat, just transport it. There must be a system which exchanges the heat out of the water to the environment. Maybe a radiator system, maybe a chiller, maybe an evaporative cooling system.
The amount made from severance tax is higher than the amount received from royalties on production on state lands.
25% (at least! When oil is worth more than $30/bbl the rate is higher) of the value of every barrel of oil pulled from the ground in the state is paid to the state in taxes. This produces more money than the state needs, so they distribute the excess equally in a socialist fashion as a lump sum payout to residents of the state.
The state collects this tax because they know that the oil is being by-and-large sold to other states in the union and the costs of the tax are passed onto the consumers, the population of the US, 99% of which doesn't live in Alaska. This money goes to the statehouse in Alaska and then some of it onto the residents.
California, as a counter-example, has no severance tax at all, even though California is the 3rd largest oil producing state in the US and 90% of the population of the US lives outside California.
Slashdot Mirror
I didn't stop to think about the problem of getting the liquid to your mouth, I figured the hard part was getting it to go into and stay into the cup.
Is no more ethical than pretending you are poor.
The situation you describe is no different than the old story of getting flat tire at the only gas station in town when you ask the attendant how much it will be to fix the tire he says "how much do you have?".
The seller sets a price, when the buyer meets it a deal is done. Each tries to get the best deal from the other. If the seller would try to bring buyer desperation into the pricing policy, I don't see anything wrong with the buyer doing what they can to eliminate it as a factor.
Wouldn't you be upset if you stood in line at the store to buy the same bottle of pop as the person in front of you and the cashier said it would cost you more because you look like you have more money?
Canada doesn't use voting machines for these elections. You mark an X in a box on a sheet of paper.
Most every TV out there has an iPhone app to control it over ethernet/WiFi already.
And DirecTV already has an app to control your satellite box.
I know that despite everyone knowing they didn't like what it said, very few people actually read the SOPA bill.
SOPA only applies to foreign sites with foreign name registrars. For sites like this where the US Government can get the name registrar to yank the name or can contact the site owners to tell them to take it down (or else), SOPA isn't needed and indeed wouldn't apply.
SOPA was designed to let the US government block the name resolution of foreign sites when the owners of the site and the foreign name registrars refused to do this. Once that was removed, the only actions left were to block financial transactions to the sites in hopes of defunding them.
Part of the reason Godaddy was for SOPA is because as a US name registrar, they already have to comply with these orders, they likely wanted SOPA to come into effect so this wouldn't keep them at a competitive disadvantage to offshore name registrars who can refuse to comply.
Don't you remember the Nextel craze?
People's phones would chirp and scream at them and they would press a button, it would chirp at them again and they would scream right back.
Some people would have extended conversations this way. In the middle of a room of annoyed people.
Maddening.
But it doesn't have Harry Goz. And it still hasn't answered the real question at hand, which is would you put your brain in a robot body?
Sealab 2021 is not forgotten.
A week ago, piles of them. Today nothing.
It's unclear why /. is trying to make this into some kind of referendum on American weapons or Indian-American relations.
And I found the movie to be lacking too. It was beautiful, some shots were right out of the comic book, amazing.
But it just wasn't all that good.
Face it, art is a matter of taste. Intelligent minds can disagree, one person doesn't have to be deficient to disagree with another on things like this.
Honestly, what did you expect from Zach Snyder? He makes big, dumb, pretty movies. This movie was about all you could expect from him and them maybe some. But it just didn't make the grade. Some stories just don't film well.
Golf GTIs don't get 50mpg. They get 27mpg on the US rating system, the same one the Volt gets 37mpg on.
Perhaps you mean the Golf TDI? The Golf TDI gets 34mpg on the US rating system, the same one the Volt gets 37mpg on.
I think you're greatly confused, you don't understand that the US gallon is smaller and the US measurement system produces much lower mpg figures for the same vehicles.
When measured on the same European system you are referring to, the Volt will get better figures than 37mpg. It won't get 70mpg, that's true.
http://articles.cnn.com/2012-01-17/tech/tech_web_wikipedia-sopa-blackout-qa_1_jimmy-wales-wikipedia-community-anti-piracy?_s=PM:TECH
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/01/18/wikipedia-goes-dark-for-24-hours-to-protest-us-web-piracy-bills/
I saw it covered on TV on the nightly news on some network. I'm not sure which, it was just on when I turned my TV on, I didn't tune to it on purpose.
If you don't look at the commercial news sites, don't say that there was nothing there.
The Volt doesn't get atrocious gas mileage. And Ford doesn't have a single vehicle in the size range of the Volt which matches it on overall mpg (counting only gas mode), let alone beats it so badly as to call the Volt mpg "atrocious"
As far as I know at this time, in the North American market Ford only has one vehicle in any size range that gets better mpg than the Volt (again, only counting gas mode) and that is the Fusion Hybrid. It tops the Volt by 5% (2mpg). It costs $30,000, about 3/4 what the Volt does.
Yes, you're right about the $20K buying a lot of gas. You will never make your investment on a Volt back in fuel savings. I've done the math many many ways. If you buy a Volt, it has to be beause you want to be able to drive without gas. Otherwise just get a Prius (if hybrids work at SK temps) or a high mpg gas car like Cruze Eco or one of the Hyundais and pocket the savings as gas money.
Ugh, I hate the terms charge depleting and charge sustaining. So confusing. I just use them because they are the official terms.
I messed up, using "charge depleting" where I should have said "charge sustaining" in my "(the car is already in charge depleting mode)" above. The engine is only on in charge sustaining mode and the engine only drives the drivetrain directly in charge sustaining mode.
There is no way you can discharge deeply enough to eliminate the risk of fire. You can only minimize it. The risk of fire is from the chemicals, and they are still dangerous and flammable even when discharged.
Lions (as used in the Volt) are not destroyed if they are discharged completely. It's not good for them, it reduces their lifespan. But doing it once (or a few times) won't end their lives noticeably prematurely.
It doesn't come on to go up steep hills at more than 40mph. You have badly misread this text.
The car slows down if you climb a steep grade at more than 40mph if the electric battery is low. Because of this they have a special "mountain mode" where the battery is not allowed to get that low. It reduces the range of the car by about 1/3rd and that's on top of the fact that you get reduced range climbing hills like any other car.
The gas engine will not come on PERIOD unless the battery runs out or if the temperature gets so very low that the electric car heater is so inefficient that there's little point to driving on battery. This happens at some temp below 10F.
The only time this text mentions the engine coming on and assisting at any speed is when in charge sustaining mode. Charge sustaining mode is the "regular" hybrid mode when the battery is depleted and all the motion is coming from the gas. In this mode it acts like a non-plugin hybrid, all the propulsion comes directly or indirectly from gas.
The initial mode you operate in after a charge up is charge depleting mode. In this mode the gas engine doesn't come on except at very low temperatures as I mentioned above.
I think the source of your confusion may be that the initial reviews indicated the gas engine connects directly to the drivetrain (through the ring gear) to drive the car at highway speeds. But this only happens when the gas engine is already on (the car is already in charge depleting mode). Before this info came out, GM had said (for a while) that the gas engine only ever drove a generator that generated electricity to run the electric motors to drive the wheels. But this turns out not to be efficient (as Toyota also knows, later Priuses get better mpg because they do this more often), so GM made it possible for the gas engine to drive the drivetrain directly. A lot of people got angry about this, mostly for no reason, although GM saying it would work one way and then working another I guess is at least worth mentioning.
But I emphasize again, this only happens in charge sustaining mode, which is the mode the car is in after the battery has been depleted (after the initial 37 miles or so). In charge depleting mode you can press the pedal as hard as you want and the engine never comes on. It'll hit its speed limiter of 85 but the gas engine won't come on. This is what makes the Volt a ER-EV (extended range EV) and not just a regular PHEV. This is unlike any other PHEV out there except for the Fisker Karma.
Yes, the battery must be drained after an accident. But this isn't much different than a gas car which requires the gas tank be drained after an accident. NHTSA in fact drains the gas tanks on gas cars (including the Volt!) BEFORE they wreck them because of the danger of the gasoline.
The draining of the battery is no big deal. It won't toast the battery. In this kind of wreck the battery has sustained damage that means it must be inspected and rebuilt whether it is drained or not. Also, the car is totaled after a wreck of this magnitude anyway, so the additional expense of draining the battery isn't a big deal.
It's is a hybrid. But you can drive between 35 and 40 miles without gas AT FULL SPEED. I have a friend who has one and drives for weeks at at time with no gas. I was with him when he drove up a several mile long grade of about 3-4% at 80 miles an hour on electricity only as part of the 32.5 drive to his house.
I don't know where you get the idea of short distances at low speeds from, but you're wrong. Perhaps you're thinking of the Prius PHEV or something else?
So the statement 'doesn't rely on a big oil corporation to be useful' is accurate.
To have a battery penetration here, you would have to have a side intrusion into the car which extends about 2 feet in from the side of the car. Your side airbags will have gone off, the car likely isn't even drivable.
No one is going to think their car had only small physical damage with this kind of wreck.
And your statements about gas cars are also incorrect. I've followed cars on the highway which clearly were leaking gas. This isn't a fire hazard because it's been more than a few minutes since the wreck? I've seen cars just plain catch fire on the side of the road with no wreck at all.
And gas cars can catch fire in garages too.
http://www.nj.com/gloucester-county/index.ssf/2012/01/gloucester_township_car_fire_s.html
Neither HDMI graphics cards nor HDMI monitors require HDCP. HDCP is not required on HDMI.
I ran HDMI from my DirecTV receiver to my Dell display (DVI input) for years. No HDCP required nor used (and the display didn't support it!).
There is nothing in the system that requires HDCP except the signal transmitting device. After the HDMI connection is set up, the transmitter knows whether it has active HDCP or not. The transmitter may then refuse to transmit video if the video it is to send is marked as not transportable over digital connections that don't use HDCP. For example an Xbox 360 will play games but not media content over a non-HDCP HDMI connection. A PS3 won't show anything at all over HDMI if there is no HDCP.
There is absolutely nothing enforced by the monitor vis-a-vis HDCP. If the sender sends video and monitor understands the format and encryption it displays it. It is completely up to the sender to decide what should and should not be displayed.
The rules for sending content over DVI are exactly the same as those over HDMI. If the content is marked as not showable over non-encrypted digital connections it cannot be shown over any non-encrypted digital connections, whether HDMI, DVI, MiniDP, etc.
Would it be too big an imposition to become informed about the facts before projecting hate?
Mini DisplayPort is not higher bandwidth than DVI. Mini DP has perhaps 10-15% better (usable) bandwidth than single-link DVI. But dual-link DVI has 100% better bandwidth than single-link DVI.
All of them are affected by cable length, but at any given cable length, dual-link DVI supports almost double the resolution as Mini DP.
Mini DP's connector is not less likely to fall out than DVI, DVI's connector has screws to hold it in. MiniDP does not.
Thunderbolt is not Mini DP. It is nice that Thunderbolt can situated in the same connector as MiniDP and that Thunderbolt can be used for other things. Thunderbolt however is not cost-effective. It requires active cables with signal conditioning in each end. These cables are currently $75 and are not likely to drop to the reasonable prices of USB 3.0 cables ever. And at longer cable lengths you must by optical cables and those will cost even more since the cable has the optical transceivers in it.
No, you can also play Blu-ray movies with an HDCP compliant monitor, video card and DVI cable. Or you can do it with VGA. Or you can do it on a integrated display (like a laptop). You just can't do it with non-HDCP digital video out whether HDMI or DVI (well, not at full res you can't, it must be downsampled to 960x540).
It says it's a closed loop of groundwater?
That makes no sense at all. A closed loop won't get rid of heat, just transport it. There must be a system which exchanges the heat out of the water to the environment. Maybe a radiator system, maybe a chiller, maybe an evaporative cooling system.
Or maybe it's not really a closed loop?
It's only partly that the oil resources belong to the state. It's that the state has a 25% severance tax.
http://www.centerfortaxstudies.com/blog/taxnews/2007/12/27/alaska_severance_tax_governor_signs_petr
http://housemajority.org/coms/hres/27/History_of_Alaskas_Oil_Gas_Production_Tax_Roger_Marks_20110209.pdf
The amount made from severance tax is higher than the amount received from royalties on production on state lands.
25% (at least! When oil is worth more than $30/bbl the rate is higher) of the value of every barrel of oil pulled from the ground in the state is paid to the state in taxes. This produces more money than the state needs, so they distribute the excess equally in a socialist fashion as a lump sum payout to residents of the state.
The state collects this tax because they know that the oil is being by-and-large sold to other states in the union and the costs of the tax are passed onto the consumers, the population of the US, 99% of which doesn't live in Alaska. This money goes to the statehouse in Alaska and then some of it onto the residents.
California, as a counter-example, has no severance tax at all, even though California is the 3rd largest oil producing state in the US and 90% of the population of the US lives outside California.
Oh, well then what do you have to do to qualify to receive it?
Live there.
So because HAARP is secret and isn't for watching the weather, that means it is the cause of a Russian Mars probe failure?
How does logic work in your world?