Comment Usual ignorant Torrentfreak... (Score 1) 363
After cutting its teeth as a domestic broadcaster, the BBC is spreading its products all around the globe.
The BBC have been doing this for well over half a century.....
After cutting its teeth as a domestic broadcaster, the BBC is spreading its products all around the globe.
The BBC have been doing this for well over half a century.....
Well, we do have the technology. We could have pallets with big fat QR codes slapped on the side (and by "big fat" I mean three inches or so) and robotic pallet jacks unloading the trucks, or trailers with floors that would shove pallets out the back of the truck automatically, and trucks loaded in proper order for that to make sense. For stuff that's delivered by the truckload, a whole trailer or shipping container could be unloaded and just dropped off to be dealt with by someone other than the trucker entirely.
Lots of loads can't be palletised. There would also have to be massive investment by the delivery locations as well.
I've said for a long time that I would much rather be driving next to an automated vehicle that only experiences an "incidents" once every 100,000 miles or so
I'm a trucker. I've driven over 2 million miles accident free. Many truckers have. An incident every 100,000 miles would be one a year for me and at that rate I'd hand in my license.
My Toyota Aygo claims 65mpg for 'motorway' driving. I used to regularly get that when I drove 30 odd miles a day on the motorway - at a steady 55mph! Was passed by everything.
So I think these figures are acheivable if you don't let your ego drive the car.
That's terrible. I get that out of my MK4 Ford Mondeo doing 70MPH on a motorway. The most I've had is 70MPG.
I can exceed the values and not have to drive like a nun. I was lucky enough to do an economic driving course with a previous employer. Part of that was driving round a course around Birmingham and surrounding countryside. You were timed at the start of the course and at the end you repeated the run but not only had to improve economy but also do the route quicker and use fewer gear changes.
The biggest mistake and most fuel hungry is how people slow down. Engines use no fuel at all when you take your foot off the accelerator. You should be using engine braking approaching lights, junctions etc backing off earlier than driving to the point where you need to use the brakes to stop. It takes no longer to do the journey but all that distance you're slowing down using engine braking is free. As for the old wives tales about it wearing clutches out, the last car I sold had 165,000 miles on and was on the original clutch. The next mistake they do is not trying to time it approaching lights/junctions/roundabouts so you don't have to stop.
Some people drove sports cars in the 70s and 80s, but most people drove heavy-ass sedans that had some of the worst acceleration imaginable. 90s, I agree, are much closer to current cars in capability.
Even 1980s US sports models such as the Mustang were quite poor. The 5L 1987 Mustang had a 0-60 time only 1 second faster than my 1.6L Escort.
Various European nations tax cars based on calculated mpg.
No they don't, they tax them based on emissions which has little to do with MPG or engine capacity.
Also set up wrong by the manufacturer. The 2007 honda civic has a highway MPG rating of 40mpg. I regularly get 44-46 while speeding after I fixed their design flaw in the rear end. they set the car with significant negative rear camber and with about 2 degrees of toe, I reset it to zero and zero and not only did fuel mileage numbers skyrocket by 10-15% but rear tire wear dropped to zero or undetectable.
Oh. Dear. So what you've done is make the cornering worse. Mind you given that US cars are a bit crap when it comes to bends you probably don't notice any difference.
That's all true, but manufacturers go to great lengths to inflate the figure. They disconnect the alternator, tape up cracks in the bodywork to improve airflow, remove wing mirrors(!), disconnect the brakes to reduce friction and use special oils in the engine to improve efficiency
Not in the EU testing.
For example: the dual fuel engines that can burn gasoline or methane, where because of the design compromises for the two fuel convenience, neither fuel operates at optimal function.
You're full of shit. Modern engine management systems take care of it all.
I thought they just had to have a certain fleet average fuel economy,
Given that European and Japanese cars are massively more economical than American ones, it certainly isn't that. The gas 500s do 59MPG (Imp) and the diesels 76MPG (Imp).
Nah... there won't be any good games released for these consoles that aren't on PC already. Which is probably the #1 reason.
There is no PC equivalent to the Forza series.
FORTRAN is not a flower but a weed -- it is hardy, occasionally blooms, and grows in every computer. -- A.J. Perlis
