Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:shortage? what shortage? (Score 1) 419

Oh no we can do WAY better than 35MPG. Hell I was getting 42MPG beating the living crap out of a Chevy Sprint I owned YEARS ago. Poorly tuned, had a carburator, and the AC would slow it down 5MPH on the highway. Try selling one of these today - it won't fly. You see everyone wants SUV to "survive an accident" and "see better". That car weighed nothing, didn't cocoon me in airbags, wasn't full of impact bars, and didn't have bumpers that could stop a Sherman. Hell I got hit in that thing from behind pretty good and it survived with nothing but a wrinkle in the rear quarter but that's not good enough these days. In an effort to "save everyone" we all drive around in techie wonders that weigh a metric shit ton!

I drove one of the new Ford Cobra, makes 500+ HP and can spin the wheels if you so much as sneeze! Drives like a fat pig because it has so much damned mass to it. Must be at least 4Klbs so while the HP number is stunning it's acceleration is far worse than it should be because it's trying to shove all that fat down the road. 300HP in a Miata would probably give it a run for the money. Speaking of which, the Miata has also blown up like a Macy's balloon. Seen the new "Mini"? They ought to call them Maxi they've grown so fat.

So can we make high MPG cars? Sure we can! Drop some of the safety standards and let manufacturers build smaller lighter cars. No one will buy them because they all want heyuge boats they can drive like bumper cars but they sure as hell could do it. Shit in my state they want to drop the damned gas tax and raise sales tax. Penny wise and pound foolish all the lemmings are cheering. If I were king for a day I'd double the damn tax and watch the piles of SUV hit the sales lot for pennies on the dollar. A friend of mine has just been handed a monster commute, he did the math and it's CHEAPER for him to buy a damned Prius than it is to drive his gas guzzler to and fro - the savings will likely pay for his car payment - seriously!

Comment Re:265 miles vs 300 miles (Score 1) 419

Alcohol was never about MPG, it was to stretch the supply of crap gas and to lower emissions by forcing carburated cars and crappy EFI cars of the day to run leaner. Those benefits went out the window LONG ago, EFI these days run wide band O2 sensors and some of them run sensors to detect alcohol percentage too for adjustment of fuel ratios. This stuff is providing zero benefit other than an octane boost to crappy gas. For a performance car tuned and built for it alcohol is nice, especially E85, as the octane is outstanding. you can optimize spark, raise compression or boost, and make big power. But you will be flowing TONS of it to do so and that is plain retarded for a trip to the grocery. If I could get access to E85 I'd run it in a performance car but not in a commuter. Better is running it in a tuned performance car and spraying pure alky only when octane was needed - been there done that and it helped a great deal. But when not under boost it's not needed and they shouldn't be adding the crap to our gas! As you've seen the stuff doesn't help mileage which if you lookup the BTU values for gas and alcohol is clear as day. Hell in my area you can't even buy gas without it - EVERY pump has this trash in it.

Comment About time? Way BEYOND time! (Score 1) 419

Ethanol was added to gas to reduce emissions and to stretch limited supply. How did it reduce emissions? By making cars run leaner. See when this was first done cars ran carbs and really crude EFI. The alcohol made the cars run leaner than straight gas and it also provided some octane bump so crappier gas could be sold. Trouble is we don't run carbs any more and the EFI on most of the cars running around is smart enough to recognize the leaner mixture and richen it up. Emissions benefit out the window and we all see the MPG hit from this stuff. Alcohol is a terrific fuel for max power - if you jack the compression ratio and boost to the Moon and run it rich as hell. Economical it sure isn't and the exhaust is damn near noxious. For commuter cars built to to be able to run on straight gas compression ratios and boost must be kept down to allow for it, no benefit from the higher octane and other benefits for power that alcohol can offer. Build a car that can only run on high percentages of alcohol and you might see some benefits power wise (and tuners DO this) but forget MPG. Alcohol simply contains LESS BTU per gallon than gasoline and is a poorer fuel per gallon for normal HP applications. All those "flexfuel" capable cars are giant compromises running around. The only way to get anything decent out of something liek that is to slap a turbo on it and a fuel sensor to jack boost up when there's decent octane, anything naturally aspirated is screwed. Even if you do this you won't see an MPG benefit to speak of IMO but certainly higher HP when flooring it.

As an added bonus alcohol is corrosive and while many brand new cars can handle it (maybe) many BOATS and mowers cannot at it's current levels and cars are showing some issues too. This gets better - they want to INCREASE the amount of alcohol allowed to be dispensed at the pump for normal commuter cars. Think there are issues now? Just wait and see. MPG will go DOWN further and you know damned well prices won't follow.

Then there's the fact that we make this stuff from corn which is a feedstock and food. This is fine when we have a surplus of the stuff floating around but right now we don't. We'd be better off selling surplus to countries that need it or finding other uses I think. Mind you I'm a gearhead and love the power potential of things like E85 with a honking big turbo but the ideas that this lowers emissions and somehow has benefits is a joke. Alcohol has octane but you have to flow much more of it and it's not economical at all while it's trying to eat up your fuel system.

Comment Only issue I'm seeing... (Score 1) 266

My data connection drops, I have to toggle Roaming to get it back. I've never had roaming turned on and prefer it off but turning it on and then back off or simply turning it on brings back the data connection - for awhile. The screen also seems a bit dimmer and softer especially in dark conditions but I'm not seeing any issues with battery life or performance of 3G for phone calls. The data thing, THAT is a killer that needs to be fixed and hopefully without breaking the jailbreak that's out.

I've done the jailbreak on an iPad2 and want to do it to an older iPhone 4 but I'm having issues upgrading the 4 to 6.1 from 5.1.1 that I suspect have to do with the jailbreak. I'm going to take it through recovery mode with fingers crossed as a simple upgrade wouldn't do it nor would it clear correctly when asked. This experience is making me a little less eager to jailbreak my primary device to say the least. However some of the tweaks are pretty nice and I'll admit make Android a little more attractive. They have their own issues too with custom ROMs and whatnot so I know it's no panacea there either and I like my existing hardware. We'll see what Apple does next, if they break the JB I'm going to be peeved...

Comment 150 is significant? (Score 3, Interesting) 199

He supposedly got a million subscribers on the first day, including myself. 150 takedown notices is significant in light of this? Google probably process that many in a half day and no one says a thing. That this new service has so few should probably be the news rather than the other way around. This seems pretty trivial to me, especially in light of the fact that his previous service handled so many takedowns that they granted the content folks special access like YouTube does. Bet he doesn't do that again...

Comment Re:Summary doesn't appear to understand BitTorrent (Score 1) 307

Seems simple to me - did the computer (aka exit node in TOR speak) request the file? Yes? Sue them into the ground. "Proxy" you say? Well, we'll sue you until broke anyway. This isn't the same as a router or switch, proxies are not infrastructure in the mechanical sense but are programs which in this case could be argued were being used to skirt the law. That is how a lawyer would likely attack this and truthfully they wouldn't be far off the mark. You want to risk your home, savings, and future income on a bunch of "peers" understanding your very thin point on this? That they wouldn't also pile on a metric crapton of other charges based on additional files on your computer "discovered" while looking for this content? That the warrant would be wide enough to snare that and more? Goforit dude! I'll watch from the sidelines on this one.

From the standpoint of the node they lay out there to snare others it will look like your computer, despite acting as a "proxy" requested the files and for that reason they will attack you just as they attack users now. From their standpoint you're guilty and in reality you will have asked for the file even if it was for someone else. Kind of like holding drugs for someone else, how well does that work out these days? When the smoke clears, even if found "innocent" somehow, I'm betting you won't be willing to cheer the victory too much. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt I'm sad to say...

Comment Summary doesn't appear to understand BitTorrent... (Score 1) 307

TPB never served up content, not ever, when it was serving up torrent links and has been pointed out they DO still serve LINKS. The "S" in his summary is typified incorrectly. In his example "S" is characterized as TPB, it's not. Instead "S" is the first USER who has submitted a torrent link to the TRACKER. The tracker never, not ever, not even once, passes any of the actual content information thru it. The Tracker simply tells the first person that asks for it how to contact the USER who has offered up the content - that's "S". This is a critical misunderstanding on the part of the person who wrote this IMO. What's weird is that the writer almost seems to understand it later in his writing but stating the TPB served up content pretty much screwed the pooch concerning his understanding torrents I think.

In addition, if I were a movie studio and a connection were proxied through a user's machine in the manner that he appears to be advocating rather than directly to a consuming user I'd still sue the proxy. My argument would be that the proxy did indeed download the content - and I'd be right. Never mind that the data was "just" passed along, I think an argument could be made that the proxy requested and received content and that no matter what was done afterwards I'd prosecute the proxy for having downloaded content. I might also attempt to find out who the originating user was who requested the content but I'd be happy prosecuting proxies because sure as hell after a few of them were coughing up tons of cash no one would be allowing their machines to knowingly proxy. It's for this reason that I won't become a TOR exit node or allow my WiFi to run wide open. Perhaps in those cases I could claim innocence, just as I might running this proxy idea, but the end result would be the same - financial ruin which is the example that the MAFIAA wishes to make in order to chill uses of this kind of technology. I happen to not be willing to take that risk with my current place in life. A very large part of his scheme rests upon the idea that a proxy isn't responsible for the data that passes through it, is that really solid legal ground? I'd argue not and proving yourself a proxy without declaring it openly, which would likely violate ISP TOS for most home connections, could be financially painful in any case. Does anyone REALLY want the Govt. kicking in a door and rooting through everything they own searching for this? Perhaps you're completely legal but I'd hazard to guess not everything they look at could be declared so once placed under a microscope, I'd prefer they stay out of home just in case.

That said, let's imagine a place where this was actually created. ISP already scream that Torrents take up a hugely disproportionate amount of bandwidth. What is proposed is a doubling or trebling (++) of that usage as the SAME bits get shuffled place to place in a bit of a shell game. Does this benefit the 'net?

IMO, there has to be a better way and I don't think that this is it. I wish I had a solution but from where I sit this sure doesn't look like a good one...

Comment Re:10nm particles... (Score 1) 163

No actually I do not see answers to my questions so clearly as you and apparently others do.

No health impacts from this? So then you'd be willing to swallow it? Get it in your hair? Eyes? Lungs? Food? How about a gel capsule down the hatch? Did you see anything in either linked article that mentions this? I didn't. I see what is supposed to be a harmless acid and hydrogen mentioned as byproducts, nothing more. Hey is Graphene okay to swallow? Buckyballs? You might be surprised. You might not want to swallow any of this and you may also find that if it's produced in quantity that it will find it's way into our food chain or used as a weapon. I'm not against it, just not quite so quick to become excited. That you so quickly dismiss this line of thinking, along with others, is amusing.

Product of the reaction is an acid and hydrogen. With tap water? Sewer water? Distilled water? Are we going to be taking the equivalent of drinking water to use this? If it's potable water then it's a bit more valuable than something I'd drain a ditch to get. If on the other hand I can use ditch water and the result is this acid, hydrogen, and the waste from the water then we might kill two birds with one stone - hence my question concerning it and my concerns ref potable water. I didn't mention exhaust, I know what the byproduct of burned hydrogen was and thought that was obvious.

No water used to produce this? Another post mentions that it's much the same as a chip manufacturing process (is it?) - lots of water and other chemicals used in that. Some of those chemicals are nasty BTW. I see nothing in the article regarding usage of water for production either for or against so I'm interested in why you dismissed this so quickly. Can you cite anything regarding producing this? Do note that it says "significant energy and resources" in the article...

The article states that hydrogen and acid are created, it mentions nothing about the medium being completely consumed or chances of recovery recovery. Citation please.

Waste byproducts of creating these - also not answered and yet you find the question redundant? The process for creating these is simply stated as " significant energy and resources to produce" and nothing more is said. Where exactly did you find the answer concerning this? I'm betting they aren't simply grinding down beach sand and since the spherical shape appears to be important to the process that would seem to imply some sort of process such as vaporization. That you leap to the conclusion that this process produces NO waste is amazing. Again, cite your sources for the conclusion since you so readily dismiss the question. Hint: it ain't in the linked articles or in the minuscule announcement made in the further linked article.

Comment 10nm particles... (Score 5, Insightful) 163

What's the health impact of these getting into the ecosystem? Pass right thru a human? Cause serious disease? What happens when it hits the water IN a human? If this becomes in any way widespread these are going to be issues.

What's left after the reaction? Must the water be pure or can we produce power from dirty water and do what with what's left? Could this be used to clean dirty water by simply using the water for power? Is oxygen also produced from this - I'd think so right since water is H2O. Are the particles completely consumed in the reaction? No reuse? How much water is used in the manufacturing process to create these particles? What are the waste byproducts for the process of creating these particles?

Comment To answer the question... (Score 1) 305

Yeah, I use the autocomplete suggestions often. When I'm typing in a query it's often about something I want information about and if the autocomplete pops up with something close to what I'm looking for I select it knowing it's been asked and answered by Google using those terms previously. This is a pretty obvious way to use the search system and I suspect quite a few others use it this way too since Google has kept the autocomplete around despite controversy. Certainly when terms pop up I'm not searching for I ignore them (I'm an adult), frankly I seldom search a person's name anyway so this popping up wouldn't concern me a bit.

BTW everyone is making a great deal of noise over his bankruptcy having been annulled. When was it annulled? Was it years ago? Recently? How much debt did he walk away from? These are pertinent questions to be asked and while having this somehow "annulled" is well good and fine when you want to bitch at Google how about getting the whole story on it? It may be a past misdeed but the circumstances may matter a great deal to those considering his sefvices...

Comment Re:Plex will do exactly what you need (Score 2) 272

Take a look at unRAID. I'm currently running it and have been for years but am now also looking at NAS4Free and wow is it waaay more complicated to setup! It's going to be faster mind you and I can use it's NFS shares for VM storage but no way would I ask someone who wasn't willing to spend a few hours to set it up to try it out. I am considering trying FreeNAS too, especially since you seem to like it's interface better, but it's going to be VERY hard to beat unRAID for simplicity IMO...

Comment Re:An ultimately simple concept... (Score 1) 272

use Plex as an IOS client. Run it on say unRAID as a plug-in or on a separate computer (I run it on a VM). Plex handles the DHCP issue and the piercing of your firewall, it can also sample down the media to allow it to stream on low bandwidth connections. For storage I do unRAID for many of the reasons posted elsewhere here and it's been working great or quite a few years for me.

Comment Re:The OP needs a NAS with ZFS! (Score 2) 272

I too have been running this for years and years now for pretty much all of the reasons mentioned. Recently I've begun having some REAL fun and have virtualized unRAID on an ESX host and am now able to run a bunch of other VMs too. I'm fiddling around with NAS4Free as a second NAS package to store the VMs and to create a cache drive for unRAID. Let me tell you, the software setup for unRAID is child's play compared to some of the fun I'm having trying to setup this other package. It's certainly doable and it can do ZFS, ISCSI, and other things but no way in hell would I recommend it for someone who just wanted to load up some software and quickly go. unRAID really does make things very easy and while I'm having a blast with my more complex setup it's overkill for most folks even geeks like myself.

I wouldn't just do a share on a Windows or Linux machine for sure, I wouldn't do a complex ZFS thing with even more complex expansion, but unRAID? Oh heck yes - I have even given away a couple of these boxes as Christmas gifts they're so easy to maintain!

Slashdot Top Deals

"In order to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe." -- Carl Sagan, Cosmos

Working...