The DOT budget in Cali is ~ $14 billion a year. This is a rounding error.
For security my wifi access point only allows editing settings from the ethernet port. I can't log into the control panel via wifi.
a simple security arrangement that might be hackable, but it does make things harder.
It is the only time my laptop's ethernet port gets used any more.
Not true. Electricity can wear out. The time frame is much longer but it does happen.
Electricity has resistance. resistance adds heat. The sun adds heat. hot
That isn't even talking about erosion and physical damage from being outside.
So yes solar panels can wear out. You might get 30-50 years out of one but it will happen.
In most sane countries you are required to keep a distance long enough that the car in front can perform an emergency stop without you hitting it. If you do hit it, you've caused the accident (and in Oz, will get hit with a negligent/careless driving charge).
Pff. I'd say the UK is a sane country, and we have very safe roads compared to most countries. We generally have decent drivers: the safety level is despite the relatively high density. But...
Well, I tried maintaining a safe distance on the M25 once and it was simply impossible. I mean literally impossible. You can slow down until the gap in front of you widens and once it's big enough, someone zips into it. Then what are you meant to do? Well, you can keep up the process in which case, people keep zipping into the nice gap. If you keep on slowing down people will STILL keep going into the gap and you'll present a hazard.
I ended up just giving up and going at the same speed as the surrounding traffic (the M25, so that's about 20 mph, amirite?).
Keeping a safe distance is one of the simplest things I can do.
There are two points: Firstly if the roads are sufficiently empty, but on crowded roads even with basically everyone driving decently it becomes more or less impossible.
Secondly, you can't control the idiot behind you who insists on not keeping a safe distance.
Check out My Gate Array Project if you haven't already done so. The EE work is done by Chris Testa KD2BMH, I mostly do systems programming and business but do a lot of design checks, etc.
Repeating the AC because he's posted at karma 0. That's "University of California at Berkeley", AC, but the rest of this is spot on:
Berkeley University is pushing really hard to get universities to adopt RISC-V (an Open ISA and set of cores) as a basis for future processor and architecture research. The motivation behind RISC-V was to have a stable ISA that isn't patent encumbered, isn't owned by one company, and is easily extensible (OpenRISC didn't fit the bill here).
I can see that ARM and MIPS would have a problem with this, especially as there is nothing particularly innovative or performance gaining about either ISA, and some recent RISC-V cores have demonstrated similar performance to some recent ARM cores in half the area. This is there way of fighting back against something open that stands to lose them significant marketshare.
Cool. Someone found us the agenda!
I get paid to train EEs within large companies on intellectual property issues, and to help the companies and their attorneys navigate those issues. Infringement is rife within software companies. Not because anyone wants to infringe, but because of a total lack of due diligence driven by ignorance.
You've made my point for me.
And any informed patent holder knows that any violation must be prosecuted, or the validity of the patent evaporates.
No, that's just the ignorance of the uninformed that "everybody knows", but it's wrong. You don't lose your patent from failing to enforce it. You might be confusing it with trademarks, which can go into the public domain if you allow them to become generic terms rather than specific brands. And you can sometimes lose the capability of being able to enforce against a specific infringer if you hold back until the market develops, that's the Doctrine of Laches. But you don't lose your patent. Nor would you lose your copyright due to failure to enforce.
This is hopefully a big step against DLC in general.
Not really. There's three official DLCs for Skyrim (not counting the high-res texpack, which is free) and game mods may require any number of them. Many of the most interesting mods require at least the two larger (and more expensive) expansions.
The problem is that Skyrim is still hugely popular and active. It still has a healthy modding community, so people are actually still buying the game. You need a healthy mod community to make it worth it, but that also precludes doing it...
There is no reason that a company couldn't custom design a safe frame first and build a car around that, but the big (3?) names aren't nimble enough or interested to become that until more Tesla-like companies come along to shake up the market.
It costs a lot to build a safe car. Tesla and Audi A8 drivers walk away from accidents that tear their cars in half. But you'll note that these are some of the most expensive cars to produce. Cadillac is now using the same techniques (plus some, so they can build an aluminum unibody with steel floor pans) so your wish has been granted, the first genuinely safe cars are coming out from a big 3 automaker. Problem is, they're coming from the marque that doesn't share platforms.
Except the number of accidents caused by these systems is lower than the accidents prevented.
That's not really clear. What is clear is that safety systems tend to reduce the severity of accidents, so that less of them are fatalities.
Skyrim players are used to clicking and getting the mod for free. They could have offered this feature with a new game, but Skyrim players must have reasonably been worried that content they'd been getting for free would cost them money.
This is the airplane speech about automotive safety devices from Fight Club, right?