Nowhere near half the vehicles on the road have AWD/4WD. I would save not even half the vehicles on the road are models that offer AWD/4WD. But there are a lot of them out there. Also, your stuff about adjustable ground clearance isn't really true. The only non-SUV that had that (recently) was the Audi allroad. That vehicle is no longer available. Audi killed that vehicle in favor of the Q7, an SUV.
And people have been buying SUVs for vanity nearly forever. As you say, rarely do people take them off road. And on road, AWD doesn't make your car safer, it just makes it possible to get there sometimes when you might not have been able to otherwise. But in those cases, virtually everyone has the option to just stay home. That's a lot safer. People have been buying them because they are afraid to buy wagons and minivans (depending on the size of your loads) because they're not "manly".
There is another problem with your comments. Those sedans with AWD still get horrible mpg. You give up 2 mpg highway and 1-2 mpg city to pick up AWD. It is very difficult to find an AWD sedan/wagon that gets over 25mpg highway. My A6 gets 24mpg. The allroad variant of it mentioned above gets 21mpg. This is all dismal.
The working poor needing to pawn stuff is because you can get secondhand SUVs very cheaply, especially Explorers, which get truly awful mpg. People need to be smarter with their money. Don't just buy the cheapest vehicle, buy the one you can afford to run.
Unfortunately, this cuts both aways. When buying my A6, I look at the options, and it would have been much cheaper to buy an SUV for $30K even though the mpg would be worse, compared to the $44K I paid for my A6. If I had made the fiscally smart decision on buying, I would be using even more fuel than I am right now.
There's only one way to incent people to buy vehicles that get better mpg, despite higher initial price. Unfortunately it's very unpopular.
Often it's the stuff the other poster mentioned about they want to put names on the movie posters.
Pixar doesn't use the actors names on their posters, but they also want certain kinds of voices. As versatile as Billy West, Tom Kenny or Elizabeth Daily might be, they end up either sounding boring or like cartoon voices. Neither is something the movie companies are looking for.
Billy West is right. And usually the reviewers and attendance respond positively to these techniques. I agree there are downsides to it too, it makes it difficult to make character-driven animated movies, instead creating "star vehicles". This isn't much different than the non-animated movies made by Hollywood.
I guess I described the problem wrong...
on
More Wii-mote Info
·
· Score: 1
Here's the problem better described. If you turn off all controllers attached to the 360, it will automatically log on any attached wired controller as player 1.
So, let's say I'm playing along solo, and my controller runs low. I decide to attach the play n charge kit to charge it while I use my other controller to play.
So, I first turn off my current controller. Whoops, it turned it back on as player 1 without giving me a chance to set the other controller as player 1. Okay, let's try it the other way, let me turn on the other controller first, then turn the current controller on. I turn on the 2nd controller, and it becomes player 2. Now I turn off the current controller. Whoops, now I have only on controller on, but it's not player 1.
Perhaps what you did is turn on a wireless controller first (getting it P1) and then plug in the 2nd controller (getting it P2)?
I dunno. Anyway, I sure couldn't figure it out.
It does seem like they could fix it in a software update. Maybe they did. I last tried this in February (dearth of good games, didn't turn my 360 on again until GRAW came out).
I have a Kill-A-Watt for two years now. I measured the power at the wall socket. Additionally, I was tipped off to the problem by seeing my temperature controlled fan for my 360 was still on even though the 360 was "off".
I do not have overheating issues. The 360 cools itself fine (if not a bit loudly) as long as you don't put it in an enclosed space. Since it is so loud, I had to put it in an enclosed space and thus I had to find a way to ventilate that space. I do not feel the 360 gets hotter than I expect from a device that has a 180W power brick (which I put outside the enclosed space).
"1-You will recognise Catalonia as your ONLY homeland 2-You will never deny wherever you are, your condition of Catalan that aspires to free Catalonia; but all the opposite: you will be proud of being one and of knowing that you are. 3-Consider the Catalan language as beautiful and rich as any other, and you will not fall on the shame of communicating with other Catalans, verbally or in writing, in any other language that is not the Catalan."
I'm not Catalan or a Spaniard. But I'd be angry if I saw separatism such as this in my country too. People need to get along more and Balkanize less.
Your polemic that Spanish is not a language is absurd. The purpose of words is to convey ideas to others clearly. Wish to rename something simply because you disagree with the etymology of the word is both foolish and a scary parallel to Orwell's ruminations on language.
The play and charge doesn't really excite me. I use it, but when it runs down, I just grab my other controller with 2 AAs in it while the play and charge charges from my iPod USB power supply.
The play and charge has two major flaws: 1. If you charge your controller off your 360 while the 360 is "off", the 360 isn't really off, it is taking over 80W of power. It basically just turns off the video out. It gets hot and wastes a lot of power. 2. If you charge your controller off your 360 while the 360 is on, you must use that controller as player 1. That is, if any controller is attached by the play n charge kit to the 360, it becomes controller 1. If you turn it off (perhaps to make another controller #1), it just turns right back on and becomes #1 again. This sucks. This forces you to use the tethered controller to play, even if you have another that is charged. That is, unless you want to wait until your 360 is "off" to charge, in which case you end up at #1 again.
That's why I have to plug my controller into my iPod power supply (via the play n charge cable) to charge it. Weak.
Still, all in all it is a good controller, Sony will have trouble matching it with their PS3 controller.
But you have to puncture the separator to short, not just smush the cell, that's why it's a separator.
I'm not saying a cell can't be compromised. I'm not saying a cell can't be compromised in a way that causes the next physical shock to cause a meltdown. I'm saying putting the cell in a non-flammable tub for an hour after a crash is pointless. Cells do not turn into bombs just by being shaken.
Your last sentence is really weird. Not sure how killing children comes to the fore. Additionally, the stuff about permanently disconnecting inside to not cause crashes is strange. Everything else in RC electric planes/copters is "it doesn't turn off, because if you lose power, you crash". Disconnecting all power and thus control is not a good way to avoid crashes.
The auto disconnect stuff inside is generally part of the protection circuit and R/Cers remove the protection circuit, perhaps for the reason above. That was one of my points in my higher post.
If you have a population of creatures that share an ecological niche, and one has this mutation that allows them to be more successful and thus drive the non-mutated population toward extinction, then the mutation becomes self-selecting and becomes predominant.
It is not strictly necessary that the mutation acts before reproduction.
"As to your thing that batteries can blow up after having been in a crash, I don't know where that comes from. Unless the integrity of the pack is compromised, this won't happen."
How many model airplane crashes can you imagine where this isn't the case?
I've crased my electric Tiger Moth many times and never had a problem with the pack being physically damaged. And a visual inspection will tell you if the battery has been damaged. Simply shaking the thing up will not turn it into bomb, you'd have to damage it physically.
The speed controller in my Tiger Moth (Castle Creations Pixie, very common) has software undervoltage cut off. It does not have a hardware undervoltage cut off.
I dunno about all popular R/C Li-Po chargers, but the Orbit Microladers are somewhat and to this day do not have temp sensors.
I'm looking at the list of Li-Poly plane chargers at Sheldon's hobbies: No astroflight model has temp sensors. (the Dynamite link is busted and goes to Dan's RC stuff) The E-Flite Celectra models don't have temp sensors. I can't tell about the Multiplex model MPXM92523. The MRC models do not have temp sensors. The Thunder Power models do not have temp sensors.
At Aero Micro, one of the Great Planes chargers has an optional temp sensor. The Hobbico has an optional temp sensor (that Aero Micro doesn't sell). The Multiplex LN-5014 doesn't have a temp sensor. Again, none of the Astro Flights or Thunder Powers have temp sensors.
Do you have counterexamples? I think I did my homework here, and I stand firmly behind what I said.
Even if you do find a couple chargers that have temp sensors, the safety level still pales next to consumer electronics because the packs themselves have no temp sensors or internal protection in them. My coworkers were shocked when I brought a few Li-Poly packs back from Aero Micro and they had no protection circuits. They were shocked it was possible to purchase a cell with no protection circuit. None of our regular suppliers will sell them to us that way!
I work with Lion and Li-Poly batteries at work and in R/C.
I find the RC folks are reckless when it comes to Li batteries. At work, the device that uses the battery has an overvoltage, over temp and undervoltage cutout in hardware in addition to overvoltage, over temp and undervoltage cutouts in software. The battery also has a hardware overcurrent and undervoltage cutout on the cell. This is because the device maker cannot afford to trust the battery and the battery maker cannot afford to trust the device maker, because LIons are just too sensitive to temp, voltage and current.
RC folks meanwhile typically have software undervoltage cutouts but no hardware cutouts on the device. They remove the hardware cutouts on the cell. They use separate chargers that have software overvoltage and overcurrent cutouts and no temp cutouts.
They are many many more times at risk than a consumer device. They get away with it by being careful themselves and because there are 1/100000th as many RC devices as consumer devices.
As to your thing that batteries can blow up after having been in a crash, I don't know where that comes from. Unless the integrity of the pack is compromised, this won't happen. They don't turn into bombs merely by being shaken. If they did, you'd have exploding cell phones everywhere.
Your charger should monitor the temp, current and voltage during charging. If a pack has developed an internal short due to physical damage, it should stop charging. But again, RC chargers seem to be less careful.
(I have an Orbit Microlader. Earlier units were even more primitive!)
In the power tests, they didn't turn on power savings. That makes no sense.
Maybe you think they shouldn't turn those modes on when testing for performance either. I don't happen to agree. I run my Athlon 64 4200+ with power modes (cool n quiet) on all the time. It doesn't hurt performance.
Kyle does not close the article by saying to get a Core 2 to future proof. I selected the last sentence from the article:
"Lastly, I would advise everyone that is thinking of rushing out and purchasing their latest upgrade that we are sure to see HUGE pricing slashes out of AMD before the end of the month."
I don't know why HardOCP is all about prices all of a sudden, when the low end Pentium D was cheaper than Athlon 64 X2 3800+, rarely did HardOCP say "buy the Intel, it's cheaper".
Why repeat the FX-62 price? Good question. I would ask, why repeat the Intel price then?
AMD has not led P4 on performance for the lifetime of the P4. They have led almost all the way, but when Intel debuted the P4/400 w/dual-channel DDR at 200MHz ("800"FSB, 875P chipset)), they smoked Athlon XP. Athlon XP had a single 133MHz channel of SDR for a total memory bandwidth of 1.06GB/s. The P4/400 had 6.4GB/s memory bandwidth, and it really showed. Suddenly AMD was behind on peformance. They were behind on price/performance, but when the 865P chipset came out, the price differential in motherboards was huge. AMD mobos were expensive at the time (if you recall) and the total price difference wasn't bad for a while.
But then nForce came out and AMD kicked it up another notch, while Intel lengthened their pipeline from 14 stages to 22 stages. And Intel fell behind until Core Duo came out. Core Duo beat Athlon 64 X2 clock for clock and walloped it on power. Core 2 Duo merely extends the lead and takes the pure performance lead (Core Duo didn't clock high enough to match up).
The thesis he takes "don't bother buying expensive CPUs, CPU speed doesn't matter" cuts both ways. If true, why not recommend the Core 2 Duo E6400 or E6500? Each provides about the same real-world performance as the Athlon FX-62 at 1/4 the price. But HardOCP didn't take that tack. They said "watch for cheaper AMDs soon" instead.
(cribbed from my post in anothe rplace).HardOCP are complete AMD whores here.
They do the power tests with power saving settings turned off. This gives AMD the edge at idle, mostly due to a lower transistor count. As other sites have shown, turning the power saving settings on (as one would expect) puts Intel far out front at idle.
How do they end that article?
" I would highly suggest keeping your eyes on AMD low wattage / energy efficient processors for those projects that require a noiseless solution."
So they make Intel look worse than they are, and yet Intel still wins at under load. What's the takeaway? Buy AMD.
In the gaming, after the Intel gets done smoking the FX-62, what do they say?
"It is very interesting that in all of our testing, both "what is playable" testing and "apples-to-apples" testing, the Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800 and Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 are very close in performance. In fact, in some games they are dead even. The price difference between the two is very extreme with the Core 2 Extreme X6800 costing $999 and the Core 2 Duo E6700 at $530. Does it look like the price is justified between the two for gaming? We can safely say "no" as far as gaming goes with this gameplay testing we have performed."
Then, when speaking of AMD, do they mention even the E6700 ($530) beat the FX-62 and the FX-62 costs over $800? Nope.
"As for the AMD Athlon 64 FX-62, all of our testing shows that it does trail the two new Intel CPUs in gameplay performance. So, if you wanted to point one out as being a "winner" then for sure it is the new Intel Core 2 X6800 and E6700. But, if you look at the amount of difference between the AMD and Intel CPUs, you will see that it isn't enough to amount to anything. The only game that we saw any real-world difference in was Oblivion, and even that was tiny. A little overclocking would clear that difference up."
Any mention of overclocking levels and how the Core 2 Duo overclocks well? Much better than an FX-62 usually. Nope.
What's their takeaway from the gaming section where a $530 Intel beats out AMD's fastest chip (at $800)?
"We have proven here that the flurry of canned benchmarks based on timedemos showing huge gains with Core 2 processors are virtually worthless in rating the true gaming performance of these processors today. The fact of the matter is that real-world gaming performance today greatly lies at the feet of your video card. Almost none of today's games are performance limited by your CPU. Maybe that will change, but given the trends, it is not likely."
and then
"Lastly, I would advise everyone that is thinking of rushing out and purchasing their latest upgrade that we are sure to see HUGE pricing slashes out of AMD before the end of the month."
Way to go HardOCP. Rig your tests, ignore Intel victories and make your summary "buy AMD".
You have zero cerdibility, HardOCP.
Also, you used bullshot wrong. Bullshot is a term for fake screenshots designed for games (like EA uses). It doesn't fit here.
You can write a program to get these keys out. Yes, it will have to prompt the user for the password, but it can be done. That's what social engineering is about.
Three factor authentication (the tokens you complain about) actually moves beyond just having some secret, but also to having a token. Client certificates doesn't do this. And your saying you must have a crypto module is a dodge, not an answer. You said client certs are the solution. Crypto modules are a three-factor system, you can't run to them as validation of your argument for client certs over three-factor.
Also, I'm not going to argue that modern DRM isn't certificate-based. It usually is. But the DRM makers know the certificates are a point of attack and so they don't just store the certs in the regular keybag on the system. They are hidden, under Windows, they actually scatter the access method into system calls all across the system, not just those that relate to security.
So saying that since DRM isn't cracked, system keybags must be safe too doesn't really follow.
In short, the system you speak of is subsceptible to the same social engineering as a simple password system. It's even largely subsceptible to keylogging, unlike three factor systems.
I'd love to protect people from their own mistakes. But it's very difficult to do so when users can be convinced to fork over what should be their most protected information.
Then it doesn't authenticate who you are. It's just another secret piece of info that you have.
And as such, there's no reason someone can't socially engineer it out of you. It's actually less secure than the secure IDs you speak of being a problem because the expiration period is much longer. If you weasel it out of them, not only is it good for more than a minute, but it is good until they figure out they have been duped. Whereas a secure ID sequence number is only good for 1 minute or until it is used, whichever comes first.
Only if the certificate has your IP address in it, and is useless to anyone who weasels it out of you does it provide any additional protection for users (in this case, from themselves).
If you require client-side certificates, you can't bank from any machine you want, only from a particular machine. Because in order to prevent man-in-the-middle attacks, your client certificate has to have the IP address of your machine in it.
Actually, if your provider doesn't even assign static IPs, you can't really use client certificates at all.
For me, the major takeaway from this is that a fool and his money are soon parted, no matter how much technology you try to use to prevent it. Or, another way, nothing is fool-proof because fools are so ingenious.
Just because it'll only use Cingular SIMs doesn't mean it won't work in other countries. You just have to keep using your Cingular SIM (and paying Cingular) when you are in those other countries.
Are you new to GSM or something?
I buy my phones unlocked, because I like the options. But I also understand that most devices are sold locked in the US but that doesn't mean you can't make calls or use data overseas.
you: "..read all of the (public) analysis of the event.."
me: "I already read it."
You suggested I read a body of evidence, I looked it up and read what I could find.
You misread my statement.
Despite having read what I could find, I don't consider myself an expert. Unless you are holding back some info you have, I don't consider you an expert either though. Those closest to the case are the experts and they have not named any culprits.
A preponderance of wild-ass guesses doesn't add up to good analysis.
There's no "the CIA held one of the receiving phones". There's no "CIA agents were seen at the scene". There's no "the CIA was tied to Ericsson" or the install.
In fact, the closest thing to involvement is "some calls from the interceptor phones went to the US, some to Laurel, MD (NSA headquarters)". The NSA being a different entity than the CIA.
There's simply no evidence to state assertively that any particular party did it. You can sure see the motive for the NSA (or CIA) to do it, but motive along doesn't make conclusive proof.
Makes no sense to me. It would be rather difficult for the CIA to keep any modifications to that equipment along the way a secret under the later scrutiny, since there shouldn't even be any Americans involved in the transaction.
Slashdot Mirror
It will not be delivered by a big truck that you put something on. It will be delivered by a series of tubes.
Nowhere near half the vehicles on the road have AWD/4WD. I would save not even half the vehicles on the road are models that offer AWD/4WD. But there are a lot of them out there. Also, your stuff about adjustable ground clearance isn't really true. The only non-SUV that had that (recently) was the Audi allroad. That vehicle is no longer available. Audi killed that vehicle in favor of the Q7, an SUV.
And people have been buying SUVs for vanity nearly forever. As you say, rarely do people take them off road. And on road, AWD doesn't make your car safer, it just makes it possible to get there sometimes when you might not have been able to otherwise. But in those cases, virtually everyone has the option to just stay home. That's a lot safer. People have been buying them because they are afraid to buy wagons and minivans (depending on the size of your loads) because they're not "manly".
There is another problem with your comments. Those sedans with AWD still get horrible mpg. You give up 2 mpg highway and 1-2 mpg city to pick up AWD. It is very difficult to find an AWD sedan/wagon that gets over 25mpg highway. My A6 gets 24mpg. The allroad variant of it mentioned above gets 21mpg. This is all dismal.
The working poor needing to pawn stuff is because you can get secondhand SUVs very cheaply, especially Explorers, which get truly awful mpg. People need to be smarter with their money. Don't just buy the cheapest vehicle, buy the one you can afford to run.
Unfortunately, this cuts both aways. When buying my A6, I look at the options, and it would have been much cheaper to buy an SUV for $30K even though the mpg would be worse, compared to the $44K I paid for my A6. If I had made the fiscally smart decision on buying, I would be using even more fuel than I am right now.
There's only one way to incent people to buy vehicles that get better mpg, despite higher initial price. Unfortunately it's very unpopular.
Often it's the stuff the other poster mentioned about they want to put names on the movie posters.
Pixar doesn't use the actors names on their posters, but they also want certain kinds of voices. As versatile as Billy West, Tom Kenny or Elizabeth Daily might be, they end up either sounding boring or like cartoon voices. Neither is something the movie companies are looking for.
Billy West is right. And usually the reviewers and attendance respond positively to these techniques. I agree there are downsides to it too, it makes it difficult to make character-driven animated movies, instead creating "star vehicles". This isn't much different than the non-animated movies made by Hollywood.
Here's the problem better described. If you turn off all controllers attached to the 360, it will automatically log on any attached wired controller as player 1.
So, let's say I'm playing along solo, and my controller runs low. I decide to attach the play n charge kit to charge it while I use my other controller to play.
So, I first turn off my current controller. Whoops, it turned it back on as player 1 without giving me a chance to set the other controller as player 1. Okay, let's try it the other way, let me turn on the other controller first, then turn the current controller on. I turn on the 2nd controller, and it becomes player 2. Now I turn off the current controller. Whoops, now I have only on controller on, but it's not player 1.
Perhaps what you did is turn on a wireless controller first (getting it P1) and then plug in the 2nd controller (getting it P2)?
I dunno. Anyway, I sure couldn't figure it out.
It does seem like they could fix it in a software update. Maybe they did. I last tried this in February (dearth of good games, didn't turn my 360 on again until GRAW came out).
I have a Kill-A-Watt for two years now. I measured the power at the wall socket. Additionally, I was tipped off to the problem by seeing my temperature controlled fan for my 360 was still on even though the 360 was "off".
I do not have overheating issues. The 360 cools itself fine (if not a bit loudly) as long as you don't put it in an enclosed space. Since it is so loud, I had to put it in an enclosed space and thus I had to find a way to ventilate that space. I do not feel the 360 gets hotter than I expect from a device that has a 180W power brick (which I put outside the enclosed space).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_Revolutionary _Separatist_Party
_ Revolutionary_Separatist_Party&oldid=38356746
In case that changes, here is a link to the version I looked at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Catalan
"1-You will recognise Catalonia as your ONLY homeland
2-You will never deny wherever you are, your condition of Catalan that aspires to free Catalonia; but all the opposite: you will be proud of being one and of knowing that you are.
3-Consider the Catalan language as beautiful and rich as any other, and you will not fall on the shame of communicating with other Catalans, verbally or in writing, in any other language that is not the Catalan."
I'm not Catalan or a Spaniard. But I'd be angry if I saw separatism such as this in my country too. People need to get along more and Balkanize less.
Your polemic that Spanish is not a language is absurd. The purpose of words is to convey ideas to others clearly. Wish to rename something simply because you disagree with the etymology of the word is both foolish and a scary parallel to Orwell's ruminations on language.
Bunch of fat slobs playing and a person watching at home has a chance of beating them.
Yet there must be 20 poker shows a week (not counting multiple airings).
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/x/xbox360quickc hargekit/default.htm
The play and charge doesn't really excite me. I use it, but when it runs down, I just grab my other controller with 2 AAs in it while the play and charge charges from my iPod USB power supply.
The play and charge has two major flaws:
1. If you charge your controller off your 360 while the 360 is "off", the 360 isn't really off, it is taking over 80W of power. It basically just turns off the video out. It gets hot and wastes a lot of power.
2. If you charge your controller off your 360 while the 360 is on, you must use that controller as player 1. That is, if any controller is attached by the play n charge kit to the 360, it becomes controller 1. If you turn it off (perhaps to make another controller #1), it just turns right back on and becomes #1 again. This sucks. This forces you to use the tethered controller to play, even if you have another that is charged. That is, unless you want to wait until your 360 is "off" to charge, in which case you end up at #1 again.
That's why I have to plug my controller into my iPod power supply (via the play n charge cable) to charge it. Weak.
Still, all in all it is a good controller, Sony will have trouble matching it with their PS3 controller.
Yes, they can blow.
But you have to puncture the separator to short, not just smush the cell, that's why it's a separator.
I'm not saying a cell can't be compromised. I'm not saying a cell can't be compromised in a way that causes the next physical shock to cause a meltdown. I'm saying putting the cell in a non-flammable tub for an hour after a crash is pointless. Cells do not turn into bombs just by being shaken.
Your last sentence is really weird. Not sure how killing children comes to the fore. Additionally, the stuff about permanently disconnecting inside to not cause crashes is strange. Everything else in RC electric planes/copters is "it doesn't turn off, because if you lose power, you crash". Disconnecting all power and thus control is not a good way to avoid crashes.
The auto disconnect stuff inside is generally part of the protection circuit and R/Cers remove the protection circuit, perhaps for the reason above. That was one of my points in my higher post.
If you have a population of creatures that share an ecological niche, and one has this mutation that allows them to be more successful and thus drive the non-mutated population toward extinction, then the mutation becomes self-selecting and becomes predominant.
It is not strictly necessary that the mutation acts before reproduction.
Why did I say P4/400 when I meant P4/3.0 GHz (w/HT)?
And when shortly thereafter I say "They were behind on price/performance", I meant "Intel was behind on price/performance".
Anyway, I think you get the gist.
"As to your thing that batteries can blow up after having been in a crash, I don't know where that comes from. Unless the integrity of the pack is compromised, this won't happen."
How many model airplane crashes can you imagine where this isn't the case?
I've crased my electric Tiger Moth many times and never had a problem with the pack being physically damaged. And a visual inspection will tell you if the battery has been damaged. Simply shaking the thing up will not turn it into bomb, you'd have to damage it physically.
The speed controller in my Tiger Moth (Castle Creations Pixie, very common) has software undervoltage cut off. It does not have a hardware undervoltage cut off.
I dunno about all popular R/C Li-Po chargers, but the Orbit Microladers are somewhat and to this day do not have temp sensors.
I'm looking at the list of Li-Poly plane chargers at Sheldon's hobbies:
No astroflight model has temp sensors.
(the Dynamite link is busted and goes to Dan's RC stuff)
The E-Flite Celectra models don't have temp sensors.
I can't tell about the Multiplex model MPXM92523.
The MRC models do not have temp sensors.
The Thunder Power models do not have temp sensors.
At Aero Micro, one of the Great Planes chargers has an optional temp sensor.
The Hobbico has an optional temp sensor (that Aero Micro doesn't sell).
The Multiplex LN-5014 doesn't have a temp sensor.
Again, none of the Astro Flights or Thunder Powers have temp sensors.
Do you have counterexamples? I think I did my homework here, and I stand firmly behind what I said.
Even if you do find a couple chargers that have temp sensors, the safety level still pales next to consumer electronics because the packs themselves have no temp sensors or internal protection in them. My coworkers were shocked when I brought a few Li-Poly packs back from Aero Micro and they had no protection circuits. They were shocked it was possible to purchase a cell with no protection circuit. None of our regular suppliers will sell them to us that way!
I work with Lion and Li-Poly batteries at work and in R/C.
I find the RC folks are reckless when it comes to Li batteries. At work, the device that uses the battery has an overvoltage, over temp and undervoltage cutout in hardware in addition to overvoltage, over temp and undervoltage cutouts in software. The battery also has a hardware overcurrent and undervoltage cutout on the cell. This is because the device maker cannot afford to trust the battery and the battery maker cannot afford to trust the device maker, because LIons are just too sensitive to temp, voltage and current.
RC folks meanwhile typically have software undervoltage cutouts but no hardware cutouts on the device. They remove the hardware cutouts on the cell. They use separate chargers that have software overvoltage and overcurrent cutouts and no temp cutouts.
They are many many more times at risk than a consumer device. They get away with it by being careful themselves and because there are 1/100000th as many RC devices as consumer devices.
As to your thing that batteries can blow up after having been in a crash, I don't know where that comes from. Unless the integrity of the pack is compromised, this won't happen. They don't turn into bombs merely by being shaken. If they did, you'd have exploding cell phones everywhere.
Your charger should monitor the temp, current and voltage during charging. If a pack has developed an internal short due to physical damage, it should stop charging. But again, RC chargers seem to be less careful.
(I have an Orbit Microlader. Earlier units were even more primitive!)
In the power tests, they didn't turn on power savings. That makes no sense.
Maybe you think they shouldn't turn those modes on when testing for performance either. I don't happen to agree. I run my Athlon 64 4200+ with power modes (cool n quiet) on all the time. It doesn't hurt performance.
Kyle does not close the article by saying to get a Core 2 to future proof. I selected the last sentence from the article:
"Lastly, I would advise everyone that is thinking of rushing out and purchasing their latest upgrade that we are sure to see HUGE pricing slashes out of AMD before the end of the month."
I don't know why HardOCP is all about prices all of a sudden, when the low end Pentium D was cheaper than Athlon 64 X2 3800+, rarely did HardOCP say "buy the Intel, it's cheaper".
Why repeat the FX-62 price? Good question. I would ask, why repeat the Intel price then?
AMD has not led P4 on performance for the lifetime of the P4. They have led almost all the way, but when Intel debuted the P4/400 w/dual-channel DDR at 200MHz ("800"FSB, 875P chipset)), they smoked Athlon XP. Athlon XP had a single 133MHz channel of SDR for a total memory bandwidth of 1.06GB/s. The P4/400 had 6.4GB/s memory bandwidth, and it really showed. Suddenly AMD was behind on peformance. They were behind on price/performance, but when the 865P chipset came out, the price differential in motherboards was huge. AMD mobos were expensive at the time (if you recall) and the total price difference wasn't bad for a while.
But then nForce came out and AMD kicked it up another notch, while Intel lengthened their pipeline from 14 stages to 22 stages. And Intel fell behind until Core Duo came out. Core Duo beat Athlon 64 X2 clock for clock and walloped it on power. Core 2 Duo merely extends the lead and takes the pure performance lead (Core Duo didn't clock high enough to match up).
The thesis he takes "don't bother buying expensive CPUs, CPU speed doesn't matter" cuts both ways. If true, why not recommend the Core 2 Duo E6400 or E6500? Each provides about the same real-world performance as the Athlon FX-62 at 1/4 the price. But HardOCP didn't take that tack. They said "watch for cheaper AMDs soon" instead.
(cribbed from my post in anothe rplace).HardOCP are complete AMD whores here.
They do the power tests with power saving settings turned off. This gives AMD the edge at idle, mostly due to a lower transistor count. As other sites have shown, turning the power saving settings on (as one would expect) puts Intel far out front at idle.
How do they end that article?
" I would highly suggest keeping your eyes on AMD low wattage / energy efficient processors for those projects that require a noiseless solution."
So they make Intel look worse than they are, and yet Intel still wins at under load. What's the takeaway? Buy AMD.
In the gaming, after the Intel gets done smoking the FX-62, what do they say?
"It is very interesting that in all of our testing, both "what is playable" testing and "apples-to-apples" testing, the Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800 and Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 are very close in performance. In fact, in some games they are dead even. The price difference between the two is very extreme with the Core 2 Extreme X6800 costing $999 and the Core 2 Duo E6700 at $530. Does it look like the price is justified between the two for gaming? We can safely say "no" as far as gaming goes with this gameplay testing we have performed."
Then, when speaking of AMD, do they mention even the E6700 ($530) beat the FX-62 and the FX-62 costs over $800? Nope.
"As for the AMD Athlon 64 FX-62, all of our testing shows that it does trail the two new Intel CPUs in gameplay performance. So, if you wanted to point one out as being a "winner" then for sure it is the new Intel Core 2 X6800 and E6700. But, if you look at the amount of difference between the AMD and Intel CPUs, you will see that it isn't enough to amount to anything. The only game that we saw any real-world difference in was Oblivion, and even that was tiny. A little overclocking would clear that difference up."
Any mention of overclocking levels and how the Core 2 Duo overclocks well? Much better than an FX-62 usually. Nope.
What's their takeaway from the gaming section where a $530 Intel beats out AMD's fastest chip (at $800)?
"We have proven here that the flurry of canned benchmarks based on timedemos showing huge gains with Core 2 processors are virtually worthless in rating the true gaming performance of these processors today. The fact of the matter is that real-world gaming performance today greatly lies at the feet of your video card. Almost none of today's games are performance limited by your CPU. Maybe that will change, but given the trends, it is not likely."
and then
"Lastly, I would advise everyone that is thinking of rushing out and purchasing their latest upgrade that we are sure to see HUGE pricing slashes out of AMD before the end of the month."
Way to go HardOCP. Rig your tests, ignore Intel victories and make your summary "buy AMD".
You have zero cerdibility, HardOCP.
Also, you used bullshot wrong. Bullshot is a term for fake screenshots designed for games (like EA uses). It doesn't fit here.
top men
"Run this program, please."
You can write a program to get these keys out. Yes, it will have to prompt the user for the password, but it can be done. That's what social engineering is about.
Three factor authentication (the tokens you complain about) actually moves beyond just having some secret, but also to having a token. Client certificates doesn't do this. And your saying you must have a crypto module is a dodge, not an answer. You said client certs are the solution. Crypto modules are a three-factor system, you can't run to them as validation of your argument for client certs over three-factor.
Also, I'm not going to argue that modern DRM isn't certificate-based. It usually is. But the DRM makers know the certificates are a point of attack and so they don't just store the certs in the regular keybag on the system. They are hidden, under Windows, they actually scatter the access method into system calls all across the system, not just those that relate to security.
So saying that since DRM isn't cracked, system keybags must be safe too doesn't really follow.
In short, the system you speak of is subsceptible to the same social engineering as a simple password system. It's even largely subsceptible to keylogging, unlike three factor systems.
I'd love to protect people from their own mistakes. But it's very difficult to do so when users can be convinced to fork over what should be their most protected information.
Then it doesn't authenticate who you are. It's just another secret piece of info that you have.
And as such, there's no reason someone can't socially engineer it out of you. It's actually less secure than the secure IDs you speak of being a problem because the expiration period is much longer. If you weasel it out of them, not only is it good for more than a minute, but it is good until they figure out they have been duped. Whereas a secure ID sequence number is only good for 1 minute or until it is used, whichever comes first.
Only if the certificate has your IP address in it, and is useless to anyone who weasels it out of you does it provide any additional protection for users (in this case, from themselves).
If you require client-side certificates, you can't bank from any machine you want, only from a particular machine. Because in order to prevent man-in-the-middle attacks, your client certificate has to have the IP address of your machine in it.
Actually, if your provider doesn't even assign static IPs, you can't really use client certificates at all.
For me, the major takeaway from this is that a fool and his money are soon parted, no matter how much technology you try to use to prevent it. Or, another way, nothing is fool-proof because fools are so ingenious.
Just because it'll only use Cingular SIMs doesn't mean it won't work in other countries. You just have to keep using your Cingular SIM (and paying Cingular) when you are in those other countries.
Are you new to GSM or something?
I buy my phones unlocked, because I like the options. But I also understand that most devices are sold locked in the US but that doesn't mean you can't make calls or use data overseas.
you: "..read all of the (public) analysis of the event.."
me: "I already read it."
You suggested I read a body of evidence, I looked it up and read what I could find.
You misread my statement.
Despite having read what I could find, I don't consider myself an expert. Unless you are holding back some info you have, I don't consider you an expert either though. Those closest to the case are the experts and they have not named any culprits.
I already read it.
A preponderance of wild-ass guesses doesn't add up to good analysis.
There's no "the CIA held one of the receiving phones". There's no "CIA agents were seen at the scene". There's no "the CIA was tied to Ericsson" or the install.
In fact, the closest thing to involvement is "some calls from the interceptor phones went to the US, some to Laurel, MD (NSA headquarters)". The NSA being a different entity than the CIA.
There's simply no evidence to state assertively that any particular party did it. You can sure see the motive for the NSA (or CIA) to do it, but motive along doesn't make conclusive proof.
Because as you surely know (given your sig), AMD makes more than just processors.
Is there a breakdown on projected revenues from processors (related to PC sales) as opposed to Spansion memory, for example?
Naturally, the CIA must be involved.
Makes no sense to me. It would be rather difficult for the CIA to keep any modifications to that equipment along the way a secret under the later scrutiny, since there shouldn't even be any Americans involved in the transaction.
I was trying to find a link.
The advantage is it could go various directions easily, and with no need for a huge keel. But apparently, yeah, it sucked.
Most interestingly, the ship moved on the same principles that make a curveball curve.