>Are you really arguing that people have a moral obligation to be lead to the slaughter like sheep so that the paperwork is easier?
Not particularly, no. I'm all for self defense personally. I'm just saying it can really muddy the waters when the authorities show up afterwards and try to make sure justice is served.
The unspoken issue present in both situations is accountability. In the home invasion scenario, how would police (who arrive after the incident) know the difference between a burglar shot dead after he broke into the house, and a murdered innocent (invited into the house) where the home owner manufactured evidence of a break-in? On the open seas, when the navy shows up and finds people carrying weaponry, it's cut and dry. If you make arms available on both sides, the pirates could just show up on a better armed/armored/powered cargo vessel and go about their business. If the navy shows up, both involved ships point their finger at the other one... The navy is forced to board both vessels, arrest everyone and go through all the paperwork (verifying it with the port of origin) to see where the cargo is actually supposed to be. That's assuming the two ships don't just sink each other.
Exactly. TFA quotes: "Not only is it good tactically for a SWAT call out or any tactical situation, there's numerous search and rescue applications for it after a hurricane. They could send one of these up fast and assess damage." That covers what... Less than 1% of their day-to-day operations? What will they be doing with it the rest of the time? Sounds to me like the latest toy for the war on drugs or hunting down illegal immigrants or something.
>(considering size of charger) Switched mode power supplies can be remarkably compact and light weight. I've got a power adapter for an old D-Link wireless router sitting on my bench. It's on the small side of 1" x 2" x 2.5" (perfectly manageable IMO) and outputs 2.5A @ 5VDC. Apple's 1" plug-cube USB adapters output 1A @ 5V... Not particularly high current, but any smaller would be difficult to grip.
It's worse actually. In the simpsons skit, they vote down the bill over the rider. Very few real life congress critters have the integrity to do such a thing, no matter how ludicrous or unrelated it may be. Without riders, there would be no way for politicians to get their selfish and/or unpopular bits of legislation passed. Thus, the rider problem never gets fixed. Riders are a tool of corruption IMO. As long as corruption prevails, riders will continue to be tacked on to otherwise useful bills. Since governance is power and power corrupts (or at least draws the corrupt), I expect riders will be a problem until some form of major upheaval pushes these individuals out.
MIDI: Musical Instrument Digital Interface Rather than transmit music as an audio stream, MIDI sends parameters describing how an instrument is being played - the note, intensity, expression variables and such. The MIDI music you heard on old websites sounded crappy thanks to how that information was used to create an audio stream to feed to your speakers. That is, the software instruments on your computer sucked. This is not a fault in MIDI's design, but in the specific software implementation on your computer. Or, it's quite possible the music just sucked.:)
It's the holiday season, during which many people will be traveling. Since its creation, the TSA has been imposing ever more inconvenient, invasive and just plain stupid policies on travelers. Bringing those policies to light through bad publicity can browbeat the TSA into redacting them. Seems very straight forward to me.
Interesting article, but not really a fair matchup. The Odyssey's engine puts out between 2 and 6 times the power of the 356 (depending on which engine was used in that particular 356) while lugging around only 2-3 times the weight (again, depending on the 356). The 356 was running on 165-profile tires (which only modern super-econoboxes will stoop to) while the Odyssey was running on 225-profile tires - a full 2 inches and change wider than those on the Porsche. They used the period-correct tires for the Porsche (aka a 45-year-old design), while giving the Odyssey the benefit modern tires, and then modern UPGRADED tires. Oh yeah... And they were testing IN THE RAIN. I've driven my CRX (just so people know I'm not Honda-bashing) on crappy 175-profile tires - they locked up at the drop of a hat in the wet, and had less than spectacular lateral grip when dry, let alone wet. Frankly, that matchup is stacked against the Porsche in spades.
There's a Safari plugin that does just that called ClickToFlash. It handles flash the way browsers handled images in ye olden days - they're replaced with a "flash" box that you click on to let the flash tidbit load and run.
Disclaimer: I'm not affiliated with the makers of ClickToFlash, though I do use it.
Which brings into question the value of the old hard media delivery system. The media cartels are insisting their distribution system is worth $10 per disk, while it is trivial for an individual with an internet connection to do the same job FOR FREE? So trivial in fact, that some individuals may not even realize they are performing this task?
On the other hand, it could be a long-term strategy to gut the manufacturing infrastructure of the world. They start by undercutting raw ore production, triggering the shutdown of many other sources. Next (as seen here), they refuse to export their ore which drives up costs for the ore processing industry outside China. Once their ore processing industry is well established they will move on to the subsequent metallurgical processing, cutting out the world market in those areas as well. Really if they keep following this path, they'll eventually refuse to export anything but a finished product. The world can adapt by re-opening the old resources and processing facilities that China originally undercut, but that takes time. I'm sure the economists in China realize this, so the real question is what do they intend to do with the lead time they've bought with this strategy?
>A pure EV would have NO electricity-generating system, not an interchangeable one.
True, but the simplest way to engineer a standardized, interchangeable drive system for vehicles with existing electric traction motors and associated drivetrain would be a simple electric generator of some sort. That is, use the existing hardware with no special accommodations.
The Volt's batteries and charge controller work as a unit to store and provide a supply of electric power to drive the motors... This is potentially a compartmentalized power supply unit. The unit could be removed from the vehicle and it would still be fully capable of performing its function: Providing a supply of electric power.
A fuel cell similarly provides a supply of power, consuming hydrogen and oxygen to do so. Together with its fuel tank and management electronics, it represents a compartmentalized power supply unit, capable of functioning independent of the vehicle.
A 1.0 Liter gasoline engine linked to a 55KW electric generator, together with its management electronics and fuel tank, represents a compartmentalized power supply unit, capable of functioning independently of the vehicle.
What each of these "interchangeable electricity generating systems" has in common is their function: To provide a supply of electricity. Any one unit could be exchanged for another. GM gave up on this concept by having the gasoline engine provide a direct mechanical drive... Something neither the batteries nor a fuel cell could do. Why? If the amount of power transmitted into the planetary gear set is really insignificant, why would they bother with the mechanical linkage at all? Even if the electric motor that performs the same function were horrendously inefficient, consuming say... twice as much energy, twice as much as insignificant should STILL be insignificant. It simply doesn't make sense unless someone is fudging the numbers and/or trying to spin the fact that they've built a parallel hybrid rather than the series or pure EV they were saying they would.
>In addition, your position is (as still stated in the title of these posts)
See that "Re:" at the beginning of the subject line? That stands for "reply:". As in "this is a reply to:". I did not write that subject line; I am merely replying to the thread.
>You get a piece of bad information You're attacking an individual when the "facts" are contestable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Volt#Drivetrain "The 2007 Chevrolet Volt concept vehicle that appeared in the North American International Auto Show introduced the Voltec drive system, which is an attempt to standardize many components of possible future electrically propelled vehicles, and to allow multiple INTERCHANGEABLE electricity-generating systems. The initial design as envisioned in the Volt combines an electric motor and 16 kWh (58 MJ) lithium-ion battery plug-in system with a small 1.0 L engine powered by gasoline linked to a 55 kW (74 hp) generator." (Emphasis added)
Show me a GM technical document dated 2007 that describes the technical details of the Volt concept, OR SOME OTHER HARD EVIDENCE that supports your stance and I'll change my mind. At the moment, you're just asserting that I'm wrong and expecting me to adopt your point of view based on nothing but your word that YOUR point of view is correct.
>You're exhibiting a very common behavior, sticking to the false information you already built your beliefs around, rather than incorporate new facts into your knowledge. Way to repeatedly attempt to shut down rational discussion.
I just read about this design decision today. The extent of my emotional attachment to the subject revolves around my very limited previous exposure: An article or two I read about the Volt around the time GM announced it. As I recall, GM claimed at the time that the volt would be a pure electric vehicle, with an OPTIONAL range-extending gasoline generator. The gasoline engine does not sound particularly optional in this final design; It sounds like the engine is integrated into the drive train. I could be wrong... Perhaps the planetary gear that the engine drives could be replaced with a fixed gear or idler, and the volume it (and its associated fuel tank) occupies replaced with batteries. Of course, that assumes that no other auxiliary functions rely on the engine. Auxiliary functions such as HVAC heat perhaps? Electric heat requires quite a bit of power - It could really put a dent in driving range in cold climates.
As I understand it, the contested subject here is not what IS, but what was supposed to be. As has been stated elsewhere, GM promised an all-electric car and delivered a mostly-electric hybrid. They used peoples' enthusiasm for a product that potentially pushes the boundaries of automotive technology (or at least the boundaries of what joe-consumer sees) to draw attention, then revealed a final product that failed to live up to the hype. Bait and switch. A theft of peoples' time and attention.
The information in that article sounds like spin and misinformation to me. If the gasoline engine is acting as an electric generator, there's no reason it couldn't power both the traction motor and the planetary gear set motor, regardless of the batteries' state of charge.
Agreed, but I don't think that's what we're talking about here. Phones can be put on silent or turned off all together. The trick is convincing the student that the class is more interesting than whatever it is the other person wants to talk about. That the class is worth dedicating their time and attention to.
Personally, I think the drive to remove all distractions is is a symptom of poor teaching methods. Students are looking for distractions because they're bored. The material and method presented in the classroom should be interesting and engaging enough to hold the students' attention. In my mind that means something interactive. Listening to the teacher lecture or filling out a worksheet is not interactive. Nearly all of the high-tech educational material I've come into contact with has been a digitized version of that same non-interactive material. High-tech classrooms could be useful, but not without a fundamental change in teaching styles. I would say that the change in teaching style is far more important than the equipment. In fact, many classrooms are already equipped to support such changes. How many times have you looked around a science classroom and wondered what the various equipment was for, and if you'll ever get to use it? Did you? I think the good teachers may be afraid to adopt such teaching methods due to the school system's obsession with quantitative assessment. I think the bad teachers would be afraid because it would require them to deviate from their scripted norm and actually engage their students, which might expose their incompetence.
How is the cynical answer not accurate here? The article states that in most locations, broadband access is controlled by a duopoly of businesses that are unwilling to initiate a price war. This state of non-competition means prices are NOT being controlled by outside forces. The only thing that makes this duopoly better than a monopoly is that each non-competitor doesn't have the balls to actively exploit their position by raising prices.
>Next year, fake wood grain! Nah. Wood grain has been maintained as a niche retro or luxury look... It's not coming back for another generation or two. The current IN design element is glossy surfaces. Gloss black with metal accents is pretty popular right now. Apple (as usual) took the more technically impressive route here by using tempered glass in many of their products. It looks sharp, but people will eventually get bored with it, or fed up with scuffing the finish.
He's not talking about following them around with the camera, or surveilling the whole house. He's talking about setting up a two-way link between two terminals in fixed, public (in the context of the home) locations. If someone doesn't want to be observed, simply don't stand in front of the terminal.
I agree. We're talking about tires shaped like a slice of a cone. Anyone that has played with a cone shape as a child may recall that when laid on its side and rolled, a cone will pivot around its apex. So, these cone-segment tires would try to do the same thing. Even without the cone analogy, it should be apparent that the smaller inner-edge diameter will try to travel a shorter distance with each rotation than the outer-edge diameter. That difference will make the tire roll on a circular path if left to its own devices. Forcing it to follow a linear path rather than a circular one would require some degree of lateral scrubbing, the severity depending on the pitch of the cone.
In the cone-tire's defense, the non-zero toe-in that some cars' alignment specs call for also causes lateral scrubbing. You could adjust toe so the two scrubbing forces fight each other but that would only neutralize the forces against the car's suspension, not eliminate the scrubbing.
While I understand a consistent revenue stream makes life easier for the devs, is that really a good thing? A subscription model for maps and mods means that once the subscription is up, you either buy the game again (what these prices equate to) or give up access to the media you've been using for the past year. That could be a powerful incentive for some users to re-subscribe, whether the devs have been releasing new maps and mods or not. My pessimistic/paranoid side says they'll build up a semi-decent game and then just sit on it till it rots. A one-time per-item charge for maps and mods would force the developers to keep releasing new material on a regular basis. If they want to build a subscription model on top of that, say to remove the ads, run private servers and such - stuff that might actually affect the day to day costs of running the game - that's fine with me. Tacking the maps on to said subscription strikes me as over-bundling... Paying for the crap so you can get the few items you want. The music industry pushed that model for many years, much to the detriment of their public image.
The differences in velocity are generally too great. It would be like trying to stop a shotgun blast with a single layer of packing tape. If you're lucky, a tiny speck of the tape might stick to a few of the pellets as they shred the strip and continue on their way.
I've built and used the DIY kit. It's a fun, functional project to build but falls short for anything but the most basic o-scope work. It's better than nothing, but its single channel, no trigger input, tiny screen and limited processing power will leave you wanting more.
Slashdot Mirror
>Are you really arguing that people have a moral obligation to be lead to the slaughter like sheep so that the paperwork is easier?
Not particularly, no. I'm all for self defense personally. I'm just saying it can really muddy the waters when the authorities show up afterwards and try to make sure justice is served.
The unspoken issue present in both situations is accountability.
In the home invasion scenario, how would police (who arrive after the incident) know the difference between a burglar shot dead after he broke into the house, and a murdered innocent (invited into the house) where the home owner manufactured evidence of a break-in?
On the open seas, when the navy shows up and finds people carrying weaponry, it's cut and dry. If you make arms available on both sides, the pirates could just show up on a better armed/armored/powered cargo vessel and go about their business. If the navy shows up, both involved ships point their finger at the other one... The navy is forced to board both vessels, arrest everyone and go through all the paperwork (verifying it with the port of origin) to see where the cargo is actually supposed to be.
That's assuming the two ships don't just sink each other.
Exactly.
TFA quotes: "Not only is it good tactically for a SWAT call out or any tactical situation, there's numerous search and rescue applications for it after a hurricane. They could send one of these up fast and assess damage." That covers what... Less than 1% of their day-to-day operations? What will they be doing with it the rest of the time? Sounds to me like the latest toy for the war on drugs or hunting down illegal immigrants or something.
>(considering size of charger)
Switched mode power supplies can be remarkably compact and light weight. I've got a power adapter for an old D-Link wireless router sitting on my bench. It's on the small side of 1" x 2" x 2.5" (perfectly manageable IMO) and outputs 2.5A @ 5VDC. Apple's 1" plug-cube USB adapters output 1A @ 5V... Not particularly high current, but any smaller would be difficult to grip.
It's worse actually. In the simpsons skit, they vote down the bill over the rider. Very few real life congress critters have the integrity to do such a thing, no matter how ludicrous or unrelated it may be.
Without riders, there would be no way for politicians to get their selfish and/or unpopular bits of legislation passed. Thus, the rider problem never gets fixed. Riders are a tool of corruption IMO. As long as corruption prevails, riders will continue to be tacked on to otherwise useful bills. Since governance is power and power corrupts (or at least draws the corrupt), I expect riders will be a problem until some form of major upheaval pushes these individuals out.
MIDI: Musical Instrument Digital Interface :)
Rather than transmit music as an audio stream, MIDI sends parameters describing how an instrument is being played - the note, intensity, expression variables and such. The MIDI music you heard on old websites sounded crappy thanks to how that information was used to create an audio stream to feed to your speakers. That is, the software instruments on your computer sucked. This is not a fault in MIDI's design, but in the specific software implementation on your computer. Or, it's quite possible the music just sucked.
It's the holiday season, during which many people will be traveling. Since its creation, the TSA has been imposing ever more inconvenient, invasive and just plain stupid policies on travelers. Bringing those policies to light through bad publicity can browbeat the TSA into redacting them. Seems very straight forward to me.
Interesting article, but not really a fair matchup. The Odyssey's engine puts out between 2 and 6 times the power of the 356 (depending on which engine was used in that particular 356) while lugging around only 2-3 times the weight (again, depending on the 356). The 356 was running on 165-profile tires (which only modern super-econoboxes will stoop to) while the Odyssey was running on 225-profile tires - a full 2 inches and change wider than those on the Porsche. They used the period-correct tires for the Porsche (aka a 45-year-old design), while giving the Odyssey the benefit modern tires, and then modern UPGRADED tires. Oh yeah... And they were testing IN THE RAIN. I've driven my CRX (just so people know I'm not Honda-bashing) on crappy 175-profile tires - they locked up at the drop of a hat in the wet, and had less than spectacular lateral grip when dry, let alone wet. Frankly, that matchup is stacked against the Porsche in spades.
There's a Safari plugin that does just that called ClickToFlash. It handles flash the way browsers handled images in ye olden days - they're replaced with a "flash" box that you click on to let the flash tidbit load and run.
Disclaimer: I'm not affiliated with the makers of ClickToFlash, though I do use it.
Which brings into question the value of the old hard media delivery system. The media cartels are insisting their distribution system is worth $10 per disk, while it is trivial for an individual with an internet connection to do the same job FOR FREE? So trivial in fact, that some individuals may not even realize they are performing this task?
On the other hand, it could be a long-term strategy to gut the manufacturing infrastructure of the world. They start by undercutting raw ore production, triggering the shutdown of many other sources. Next (as seen here), they refuse to export their ore which drives up costs for the ore processing industry outside China. Once their ore processing industry is well established they will move on to the subsequent metallurgical processing, cutting out the world market in those areas as well. Really if they keep following this path, they'll eventually refuse to export anything but a finished product.
The world can adapt by re-opening the old resources and processing facilities that China originally undercut, but that takes time. I'm sure the economists in China realize this, so the real question is what do they intend to do with the lead time they've bought with this strategy?
>A pure EV would have NO electricity-generating system, not an interchangeable one. True, but the simplest way to engineer a standardized, interchangeable drive system for vehicles with existing electric traction motors and associated drivetrain would be a simple electric generator of some sort. That is, use the existing hardware with no special accommodations. The Volt's batteries and charge controller work as a unit to store and provide a supply of electric power to drive the motors... This is potentially a compartmentalized power supply unit. The unit could be removed from the vehicle and it would still be fully capable of performing its function: Providing a supply of electric power. A fuel cell similarly provides a supply of power, consuming hydrogen and oxygen to do so. Together with its fuel tank and management electronics, it represents a compartmentalized power supply unit, capable of functioning independent of the vehicle. A 1.0 Liter gasoline engine linked to a 55KW electric generator, together with its management electronics and fuel tank, represents a compartmentalized power supply unit, capable of functioning independently of the vehicle. What each of these "interchangeable electricity generating systems" has in common is their function: To provide a supply of electricity. Any one unit could be exchanged for another. GM gave up on this concept by having the gasoline engine provide a direct mechanical drive... Something neither the batteries nor a fuel cell could do. Why? If the amount of power transmitted into the planetary gear set is really insignificant, why would they bother with the mechanical linkage at all? Even if the electric motor that performs the same function were horrendously inefficient, consuming say... twice as much energy, twice as much as insignificant should STILL be insignificant. It simply doesn't make sense unless someone is fudging the numbers and/or trying to spin the fact that they've built a parallel hybrid rather than the series or pure EV they were saying they would. >In addition, your position is (as still stated in the title of these posts) See that "Re:" at the beginning of the subject line? That stands for "reply:". As in "this is a reply to:". I did not write that subject line; I am merely replying to the thread.
>You get a piece of bad information
You're attacking an individual when the "facts" are contestable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Volt#Drivetrain
"The 2007 Chevrolet Volt concept vehicle that appeared in the North American International Auto Show introduced the Voltec drive system, which is an attempt to standardize many components of possible future electrically propelled vehicles, and to allow multiple INTERCHANGEABLE electricity-generating systems. The initial design as envisioned in the Volt combines an electric motor and 16 kWh (58 MJ) lithium-ion battery plug-in system with a small 1.0 L engine powered by gasoline linked to a 55 kW (74 hp) generator." (Emphasis added)
Show me a GM technical document dated 2007 that describes the technical details of the Volt concept, OR SOME OTHER HARD EVIDENCE that supports your stance and I'll change my mind. At the moment, you're just asserting that I'm wrong and expecting me to adopt your point of view based on nothing but your word that YOUR point of view is correct.
>You're exhibiting a very common behavior, sticking to the false information you already built your beliefs around, rather than incorporate new facts into your knowledge.
Way to repeatedly attempt to shut down rational discussion.
I just read about this design decision today. The extent of my emotional attachment to the subject revolves around my very limited previous exposure: An article or two I read about the Volt around the time GM announced it. As I recall, GM claimed at the time that the volt would be a pure electric vehicle, with an OPTIONAL range-extending gasoline generator. The gasoline engine does not sound particularly optional in this final design; It sounds like the engine is integrated into the drive train. I could be wrong... Perhaps the planetary gear that the engine drives could be replaced with a fixed gear or idler, and the volume it (and its associated fuel tank) occupies replaced with batteries. Of course, that assumes that no other auxiliary functions rely on the engine. Auxiliary functions such as HVAC heat perhaps? Electric heat requires quite a bit of power - It could really put a dent in driving range in cold climates.
As I understand it, the contested subject here is not what IS, but what was supposed to be. As has been stated elsewhere, GM promised an all-electric car and delivered a mostly-electric hybrid. They used peoples' enthusiasm for a product that potentially pushes the boundaries of automotive technology (or at least the boundaries of what joe-consumer sees) to draw attention, then revealed a final product that failed to live up to the hype. Bait and switch. A theft of peoples' time and attention.
The information in that article sounds like spin and misinformation to me. If the gasoline engine is acting as an electric generator, there's no reason it couldn't power both the traction motor and the planetary gear set motor, regardless of the batteries' state of charge.
Agreed, but I don't think that's what we're talking about here. Phones can be put on silent or turned off all together. The trick is convincing the student that the class is more interesting than whatever it is the other person wants to talk about. That the class is worth dedicating their time and attention to.
Personally, I think the drive to remove all distractions is is a symptom of poor teaching methods. Students are looking for distractions because they're bored. The material and method presented in the classroom should be interesting and engaging enough to hold the students' attention. In my mind that means something interactive. Listening to the teacher lecture or filling out a worksheet is not interactive. Nearly all of the high-tech educational material I've come into contact with has been a digitized version of that same non-interactive material.
High-tech classrooms could be useful, but not without a fundamental change in teaching styles. I would say that the change in teaching style is far more important than the equipment. In fact, many classrooms are already equipped to support such changes. How many times have you looked around a science classroom and wondered what the various equipment was for, and if you'll ever get to use it? Did you?
I think the good teachers may be afraid to adopt such teaching methods due to the school system's obsession with quantitative assessment. I think the bad teachers would be afraid because it would require them to deviate from their scripted norm and actually engage their students, which might expose their incompetence.
A flash-blocking browser plugin can do wonders.
How is the cynical answer not accurate here?
The article states that in most locations, broadband access is controlled by a duopoly of businesses that are unwilling to initiate a price war. This state of non-competition means prices are NOT being controlled by outside forces. The only thing that makes this duopoly better than a monopoly is that each non-competitor doesn't have the balls to actively exploit their position by raising prices.
>Next year, fake wood grain!
Nah. Wood grain has been maintained as a niche retro or luxury look... It's not coming back for another generation or two.
The current IN design element is glossy surfaces. Gloss black with metal accents is pretty popular right now. Apple (as usual) took the more technically impressive route here by using tempered glass in many of their products. It looks sharp, but people will eventually get bored with it, or fed up with scuffing the finish.
He's not talking about following them around with the camera, or surveilling the whole house. He's talking about setting up a two-way link between two terminals in fixed, public (in the context of the home) locations. If someone doesn't want to be observed, simply don't stand in front of the terminal.
I agree. We're talking about tires shaped like a slice of a cone. Anyone that has played with a cone shape as a child may recall that when laid on its side and rolled, a cone will pivot around its apex. So, these cone-segment tires would try to do the same thing. Even without the cone analogy, it should be apparent that the smaller inner-edge diameter will try to travel a shorter distance with each rotation than the outer-edge diameter. That difference will make the tire roll on a circular path if left to its own devices. Forcing it to follow a linear path rather than a circular one would require some degree of lateral scrubbing, the severity depending on the pitch of the cone.
In the cone-tire's defense, the non-zero toe-in that some cars' alignment specs call for also causes lateral scrubbing. You could adjust toe so the two scrubbing forces fight each other but that would only neutralize the forces against the car's suspension, not eliminate the scrubbing.
While I understand a consistent revenue stream makes life easier for the devs, is that really a good thing? A subscription model for maps and mods means that once the subscription is up, you either buy the game again (what these prices equate to) or give up access to the media you've been using for the past year. That could be a powerful incentive for some users to re-subscribe, whether the devs have been releasing new maps and mods or not. My pessimistic/paranoid side says they'll build up a semi-decent game and then just sit on it till it rots.
A one-time per-item charge for maps and mods would force the developers to keep releasing new material on a regular basis. If they want to build a subscription model on top of that, say to remove the ads, run private servers and such - stuff that might actually affect the day to day costs of running the game - that's fine with me. Tacking the maps on to said subscription strikes me as over-bundling... Paying for the crap so you can get the few items you want. The music industry pushed that model for many years, much to the detriment of their public image.
The differences in velocity are generally too great. It would be like trying to stop a shotgun blast with a single layer of packing tape. If you're lucky, a tiny speck of the tape might stick to a few of the pellets as they shred the strip and continue on their way.
I've built and used the DIY kit. It's a fun, functional project to build but falls short for anything but the most basic o-scope work. It's better than nothing, but its single channel, no trigger input, tiny screen and limited processing power will leave you wanting more.