Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:110 or 240v (Score 1) 260

by LinuxIsGarbage (#47512249) Attached to: Google Offers a Million Bucks For a Better Inverter

Yes, because the US cheats and uses 220 split-phase to provide 110 power. Most everywhere else that needs high power uses 3-phase, as it's smoother, easier to produce and rectify, and just as safe to transmit.

3 phase makes electric motors more efficient, and that's it. Technically, you could have as many phases as you could imagine having... each making the motor a tad more efficient. But they are not "smoother" and don't improve transmission.

3-Phase AC produces a smoother (considerably less ripple) DC current pattern when rectified than single or split-phase AC.

I've seen 3 phase 700V+ DC drives at over 1000kW that are very harmonic rich. Over 100% THD. Not smooth AT ALL.

Comment: Re:110 or 240v (Score 1) 260

by LinuxIsGarbage (#47512233) Attached to: Google Offers a Million Bucks For a Better Inverter

3 phase requires the return by code. Technically however, you are correct. That's just for safety and I often question if it makes any sense myself.

In an industrial settings I deal with a lot of loads that are three phase L1, L2, L3 + safety ground only (shield on cable, chassis on machine). No Neutral. Even 4160V loads. Unbalanced loads are brought back through L1, L2, L3.

Comment: Re:Nail in the coffin... (Score 2) 92

Oh, great, it's hard enough to replace obsolete equipment as it is. Once management sees this, they'll wonder why we can't keep that old Dell server going a few more years - after all, other companies are buying the same server for this guy. IT will never get another upgrade approved ever again if this gets out. Forget the cost savings of lower-power equipment, and the massive throughput increases in newer drives.

Lucky you getting to keep that old Dell server... We have to keep that old 1983 PDP-11 going.

Comment: Re:PPC macs were awful (Score 1) 236

by LinuxIsGarbage (#47478477) Attached to: Nearly 25 Years Ago, IBM Helped Save Macintosh

When Macs didnt just needed a restart every 24 hours (like windows did) but would outright ruin there system install every other week?

You MUST be confusing MacOS and Windows.

I have been using Macs since they were called Lisas (yeah, yeah, I know. Different OS (sort of)), and using Windows since at least version 3.1, and in all those years, I have only had to resort to an OS Reinstall ONCE on a Mac (68k or PPC). I cannot even begin to count the times I had to do a reinstall on Windows. That stuff didn't even BEGIN to abate until Windows 2000.

As far as having to restart, both OSes had their fair share of memory leaks. But when it comes to "outright ruin there[sic] system install[ation]", there is simply no comparison.

I've very rarely had to *reinstall* any OS (none I can think of except a hard drive failure), but from a Stability point of view, Mac OS was junk until OSX, Windows was complete feces until W95, and Junk until W2000. This is from an end user point of view. NT was relative stable before 2000, but it wasn't end user friendly.

Comment: Re:Counterbet (Score 1) 236

by LinuxIsGarbage (#47478333) Attached to: Nearly 25 Years Ago, IBM Helped Save Macintosh

I bet Google DOES use some moderate amount of assembly. I once worked for an audio-recognition company and we did indeed use about 100 lines of x64 assembly to perform the inner loop, which was some complex audio signal processing routine. Similar to an FFT.

This was easily 10x faster than the C version, which we had for reference purposes, even when using the Intel compiker with all optimizations turned on.

So, just because you never saw a Tapir in your life, does not mean they can't exist because their dick is longer than you can imagine.

Maybe you shouldn't have been using an AMD processor:
(Intel has been slammed for their compiler creating code that directs non-Intel CPUs to completely unoptimized code, not taking advantage of SSE, etc, even when present in the non-Intel processor)

http://www.agner.org/optimize/...

Section 2.3 of this:
http://download.intel.com/pres...

Comment: Re:Even versions of Windows the good ones? (Score 1) 346

by LinuxIsGarbage (#47462039) Attached to: Leaked Build of Windows 9 Shows Start Menu Return

You still fail to count properly because the non-NT kernels don't get counted into numbering.

NT->3.5 Because it looked like Windows 3.5

2K-> 4

XP->5

Vista->7

Windos 7 -> 7

Windows 8 -> 8

etc...

You Failed to count properly
NT 3.1
NT 3.5
NT 3.51
NT 4
NT 5.0 (Windows 2000)
NT 5.1 (WindowsXP)
NT 5.2 (Sever 2003 & XP 64)
NT 6.0 (Vista)
NT 6.1 (Seven)
NT 6.2 (Eight)

Comment: Re:sponsers (Score 1) 196

by LinuxIsGarbage (#47354351) Attached to: How Apple Can Take Its Headphones To the Next Level

The only thing they ever had going for them was the unique 'b' shaped plastic. They are like a Louis Vuitton bag - not particularly functional or even attractive, but they cost a lot of money and celebutards like them so owning them buys you a tiny slice of that lifestyle.

While I don't own or like their headphones, the one other thing they have going for them is their success at ambush marketing. You see, as much as I hate their headphones, I hate the draconian advertising regulations that surround events like the Olympics and World Cup even more:

http://www.thenational.ae/busi...
http://www.theguardian.com/med...

Comment: Re: No one will ever buy a GM product again (Score 1) 307

Because you lose power steering and braking, and you could lock the fucking steering column.

I can't say I've every owned a Toyota. But all of the cars that I've owned would not allow you to turn the key back to lock the steering wheel unless the car was in park or neutral.

All the cars I've owned wouldn't let you turn it to LOCK unless the car was in PARK, and could only start if it was in PARK or NEUTRAL.

Comment: Re:Cherry Pick Stats (Score 1) 411

by LinuxIsGarbage (#47160437) Attached to: Apple WWDC 2014: Tim Cook Unveils Yosemite

So they continue to pimp their new processor power in their phones (we have an A4 in this! That's right, A4, the chip we just invented! Oh wait, now we have the A5, now the A6, A7.) And then keep bogging it down with new features in iOS that really shouldn't make that much of a difference in performance, but grind old phones to a halt, and the difference is a wash comparing new iPhone +new iOS with old iPhone + old iOS?

Your premise that newer phones don't have features that make a difference is simply false.

Basic OS operations like switching apps, bog down compared to old versions. Why does the addition of fingerprint scanner, copy & paste, Siri, or removal of Skeuomorph suddenly require a significantly more powerful processor to check email, change applications, and text? I'm not saying new features introduced are without use, but there seems to be a disproportionate increase in CPU horsepower required.

Comment: Re:Cherry Pick Stats (Score 1) 411

by LinuxIsGarbage (#47150493) Attached to: Apple WWDC 2014: Tim Cook Unveils Yosemite

Apple stop providing older iPhones with OS updates when they are no longer powerful enough to support current OS release. They got it wrong once, by providing one two many OS updates for the iPhone 3G

So they continue to pimp their new processor power in their phones (we have an A4 in this! That's right, A4, the chip we just invented! Oh wait, now we have the A5, now the A6, A7.) And then keep bogging it down with new features in iOS that really shouldn't make that much of a difference in performance, but grind old phones to a halt, and the difference is a wash comparing new iPhone +new iOS with old iPhone + old iOS?

At least with Microsoft, while there is a system requirement increase from XP (12.5 years ago) to Vista (7 years ago). The system requirements have been flat for the past 7 years through Win7, 8, 8.1. Third party applications may have bloated in that time, but the base OS hasn't.

Comment: Re:Ghost in the machine (Score 2) 128

by LinuxIsGarbage (#47132275) Attached to: Ford's Bringing Adaptive Steering To the Masses

I remember reading about a vehicle made in Europe that was completely drive-by-wire with no mechanical linkages whatsoever. Of course, some vehicles had glitches, and when they did, there was nothing to do but hope the wreck didn't kill you.

You know how many criminal organizations would love to be able to use an assist motor to jam a steering wheel at will? With how interconnected vehicles are, it might just take a bluetooth hole to get on the CANBus, then go from there.

I wouldn't blame Ford specifically, but I do worry about things like GM's OnStar being a prime target for hackers. Get control of that, disable all GM cars, tout the accomplishment, and win immense street cred. Same with getting motor-assisted steering to start jerking the wheel at random to cause crashes, it would put an organization on the map and give them respect worldwide.

Car makers have been good, but in general, most companies feel that security has no ROI, so don't do much than lip service, and coupled with all the crap that can take over a vehicle's ECM [1], it can be concerning.

[1]: I was reading about a "tattle" device by one insurance company which apparently something over the OBD 2 connector, so if the device was removed, the vehicle wouldn't start. Is this real? Doubtful, but it is concerning.

Even without steer by wire, this can be accomplished with electric power steering. As an example, look at "Active Park Assist". The system will command the steering wheel to turn, pretty much to full lock, based on what the sensors see. I assume (maybe?) if it detects resistance on the steering wheel it won't over power it, but the technology is already there for the wheels to turn as the computer sees fit. Electronic Throttle Control means the gas pedal is really just a suggestion to the computer, and hybrids with regenerative braking, the brakes are (somewhat?) brake by wire.

Plus with push button start, to kill power for have to hold the power button for several seconds if you need an emergency shut down due to a malfunction. Cars are also moving to electronic parking brakes too.

I'm all for computer dating, but I wouldn't want one to marry my sister.

Working...