The questions stands. Where is the
The questions stands. Where is the
#1 at anywhere near full throttle lockups drop out, most don't have the capability to handle full torque without risk of damage to the transmission.
So what? Many people never do that. Also, people often abuse their clutch when applying a lot of power.
#2 the biggest losses are from spinning and pumping the fluid around,
Small cars have CVTs now, completely different in design and also enabling the engine to remain in its power band more often. Traditional automatics typically have more speeds than manual gearboxes now, except for the heavy, complex, and expensive DSGs, which likewise permits greater efficiency.
we want to be in the most efficient operation for the engine while accelerating (full torque output), while cruising we want the lowest fuel burn.
Actually, peak efficiency is usually attained at about 80% of peak torque output.
That was truly the only reason I brought up the manual, It's losses are truly linear with torque all are equal.
Not at all. In fact, the losses increase more than linearly in both cases. The automatic is simply more complex. You have to take the lubricant into account in both cases. But there's also clutching to consider.
As well, in the near future KERS is going to become more common, with the TC replaced entirely with an electric motor which also replaces the alternator and the starter. It's getting cheaper and it's been proven out on all sizes of vehicle. The motor can also have magnetic lockup, which takes surprisingly little power to maintain but which won't wear out like a clutch.
Confidence in the USD is falling. The only truly substantive difference between USD and Bitcoin for the user is the confidence level.
I'd prefer the currency that is vastly less useful for tax evasion and money laundering,
Completely common in USD.
Not even the deflationary nature of Bitcoin that libertarians fawn over?
That encourages spending, which is a good thing.
Who's the contest-winning pick that's a metal machine with all the chips?
Can you dig it?
Who is the bot who would win the contest for his brother bot?
That bot SCHAFT is a bad mutha-
Shut yo mouth!
Then what's the alternative to setting oneself up for failure? I was under the impression that multi-thousand-dollar printers, multi-thousand-dollar CNC machines, and the like typically weren't sold with OS X compatibility or compatibility with forthcoming versions of Windows as a bullet point.
Those systems tend to include a Windows machine. If the vendor doesn't promise updates, you have to treat it as a black box and prepare to exclude it from your network in the future, with an air gap. Sad, but predictable. You can compare to earlier CNC machines which ran DOS. Those didn't try to do as much, though, so the OS wasn't as much of a problem.
It might be possible to get counts from Google, crittercism, or from ACRA. Go ahead and try if you want,
"...because I certainly haven't. I'd prefer to spread FUD."
Meanwhile, there was a Facebook update on play this morning that crashed my phone.
Right, we've established that anecdotes are not data and that iOS devices also crash, so meanwhile you're still sharing useless anecdotes. Actually, it's not useless: When the Facebook app shit all over people's contacts, both stealing contacts and overwriting them, I said anyone would have to be a complete fucking idiot to actually run a facebook app on their device. Thanks for the heads-up.
The space station travels at roughly 17,500 MPH.
Everything in the cosmos is traveling at roughly 17,500 MPH if you pick the right point of reference for each body.
>bad for fuel economy to let the cruise control slam on the gas to keep the speed up
that is/was true for cars with carburetors, fuel injected gasoline engines are going to be most efficient with least intake restriction at near peak torque engine speeds.
Yes, but we're talking about acceleration, not cruising.
Automatic transmissions will get less efficient the higher the engine speed, and higher the torque,
Just like manual transmissions.
if you were to go from 10% throttle to 80% throttle for 10 seconds to maintain your speed up the hill, then back to 10% versus going to 20% throttle for 30 seconds It will likely save total fuel to gas it for the shorter duration
There's no way to know unless we know the vehicle.
(definitely true in a manual transmission car.)
Stop pretending like lockup torque converters don't exist. They do.
I just want a cruise control that doesn't go to 100% throttle when I want to resume 70MPH after slowing down.
A Mercedes from the 1980s has that. Maybe you should look at a better car instead of a newer car.
On my recent model F150 there's a very handy feature: "Tow/Haul" mode.
Welcome to the 1990s, when that started to show up on vehicles. Our 2000 Astro LS has the same feature. It changes the shift points, that's about it.
Result: On mountain roads you're constantly disengaging and re-engaging the speed control.
Sigh. It says right in the owner's manual that the cruise control isn't for that.
It's pretty unlikely that anyone will come up with a useful attack on a device that's just doing port blocking, NAT, and basic routing.
Nonsense! Also, even many cheap routers do packet inspection and sometimes even packet mangling now. Virtually all of them have some means to get a prompt. Many of them are running Linux and you can load binaries into their memory via tftp and host attacks from them directly. Further, there have already been many useful attacks on these consumer-level firewall products; some of them have been as pathetic as exploiting default passwords on maintenance interfaces left open to the internet by default, others not.
Now if you're passing unencrypted data across that router, you might have a problem
It can be used to capture traffic from the local network, too, if you're crafty.
You're funny, but you make no points of substance.
Confidence in the USD is falling. The only truly substantive difference between USD and Bitcoin for the user is the confidence level. And confidence in the USD is falling in part because of deliberate manipulation of the currency by The Fed. It's quite rational to believe that supporting alternate currencies is itself a rational act.
You may have heard before that the government which can do anything for you can do anything to you. It's still true. The government which controls the currency wields extraordinary power. If you believed that they would wield this power for good, then you would have a point — but you'd be provably delusional.
That's a bit like saying it's ok for one of your clients to stick to a fleet of cars and trucks that lack modern safety features such as seat belts, air bags, engineered crumple zones, etc. Sure it works and they could make deliveries with it. But it be very bad if one of those trucks got into a collision. Also, there would probably be issues finding affordable accident insurance.
When it comes to the cars, you'd be right. But when it comes to the trucks the metaphor breaks down entirely because they aren't required to have any of that shit. It's only passenger cars. Light trucks are required to have some of it now, but not all.
Not if the software you need to run is a device driver for special hardware.
If you've made yourself dependent on hardware only supported by one OS, an OS which sucks, then you've set yourself up for failure. All that's left is for the rest of us to grab some popcorn and watch the fallout.
It's a real objection, but it's a situation you've created yourself, or that the business entity you work for has created.
You can run DOS apps from the 1990s on Windows 7
It's actually better at that than it is at running 16-bit windows programs (still crop up now and then, believe it or not) or even older 32-bit ones. I'm not sure that's actually a mark in their favor.
Beware of the Turing Tar-pit in which everything is possible but nothing of interest is easy.