Re: "Audi’s forthcoming computer-controlled motor"
No electric Audis? I'm afraid your informant is sadly misinformed. See here.
348 posts • joined 11 Jun 2009
I switched to Safari on my MacBook some time ago after I got pissed off at the main Chrome process (not one of the worker processes) persistently burning lots of CPU time for no good reason. Conveniently, I found a script to reopen current Chrome tabs in Safari, which avoided manually recreating the dozens of tabs over half-a-dozen windows I perpetually have open :-). Only things I really miss are favicons and being able to pin tabs in one window only (not in every window as Safari does).
If you're using a proper camera with removable card storage, there is a simple way to do photo backups. When the card gets full, stick a new one in and put the old one somewhere safe. SD cards are cheap enough nowadays to consider them as write-once media and they certainly don't take up much space!
That occurred to me back in the days when the Linux roadmap seemed to suggest that the version number would be stuck at 2.6.x forever. In that case, why not just drop the "2.6", just like GNU Emacs 13 or Java 5. But then, I didn't expect he'd come up with the genius idea of bumping the major version number for no good reason at all....
I believe the root cause of the the dreaded wobble was that Sinclair re-used a RAM pack casing design intended for the ZX80 (which had a flat, vertical rear surface for the pack to butt up against) for the ZX81 (which didn't). See Rick Dickinson's sketch of his intended ZX81 RAM pack in his fascinating (if you're an old Sinclair nerd) Sinclair design archives on Flickr.
Yes, history repeats itself.... in fact the supersonic Harrier programme (P.1154) collapsed because it was meant to be both a fighter for the Navy and a bomber for the RAF (like the F-35) and they couldn't reconcile that. Of course, in those days the Navy had full-size carriers with steam catapults, so they went with the F-4 Phantom II instead (not the F-111, that was what was supposed to substitute for the TSR2), as did the RAF, with the subsonic Harrier as a consolation prize.
Why? Because F-35As can fly further, carry more ordnance, and are about $28m cheaper than an F-35B, since they don't have a lift fan and associated impedimenta. Given that F-35s of some description will be the de facto replacement for the RAF's Tornado GR.4s, in addition to their original task of replacing Joint Force Harrier (now just a distant memory), the F-35A is probably the most appropriate variant to do that, since no Tornado squadron has ever been expected to fly off an aircraft carrier.
Oh and in the good old days of the Sea Harrier, the RN only had three squadrons (and one of those was a land-based HQ/training squadron) for their fleet of three aircraft carriers...
This isn't just "ARM". In order to compete with Wintel in the server space, ARM have now defined (and are in fact still working on) various specs (SBSA, SBBR), which describe a common 64-bit ARM server system architecture in (hopefully) enough detail that OSs such as RHELSA will Just Work on a variety of different hardware vendors' offerings.
Unfortunately, this means the dreaded ACPI has now spread to ARM systems, but if that's what it takes, then...
I think we need more than just hope here. What if it doesn't? Will it slam on the brakes wherever the car might be, say, in the outside lane of a busy motorway? Then what? Wait for someone to turn it off and turn it on again?
Yes, but it's how much electricity that's the problem. If you want to fully charge an electric car with a a range comparable to an ICE-powered car in, say, half an hour, (so, a power requirement on the order of 200kW) then that's equivalent to about 8 substantial houses all on the point of popping the master fuse on their mains supply. For one car.
...until you can trust a self-driving car not to say "you have control", when it decides it has no idea what is going on and you're 2 seconds away from colliding with something. And if you can't trust it not to do that, then you might as well drive the damn thing yourself.
TBH, I can't imagine any smartphone marketing person getting very enthusiastic these days about a new feature that turns your super-retina displaying, 3D-face-recognizing, animoji-capable, machine-learning, augmented-reality-projecting smartphone into a pocket tranny from the 1950s.
could they not cram the metadata* into the RDS part of the signal? (I really ought to know the correct terminology here)
[*station name, frequency, programme, song title - what else do I need - I'll watch TV if I want pictures]
Actually, that is exactly what they do nowadays - it's called the RDS RT (radio text) field. A fairly recent car radio with a big enough screen will show you it. No need for DAB to get that metadata!
I'm not sure that QNX is required for the infotainment system - which doesn't need the levels of reliability one would demand of the car's driving aids, sensors, drivetrain and autonomous functions.
All software should be reliable. There is no excuse for unreliable software. Just because a software bug isn't going ram your car into the back of a truck doesn't mean you should put up with it. Even if the consequences of a flaky piece of software is that your radio goes off, or touch-screen goes blank, or your satnav forgets where you are or where you want to go, that's still a distraction and an annoyance you could really do without when you're driving.
Australian Personal Computer magazine was first published in May 1980. It's my understanding that IBM released their PC on 12 August 1981. It's also my understanding that PCs had been around for some time prior to Australian Personal Computer magazine's debut.
Not to mention the British magazine Personal Computer World, which started in 1978.
Anyway, the IBM MT72 didn't really fall into any of these categorizations; it seems it was basically an electric typewriter connected to a tape drive with a bunch of electrical relays.
Actually, that's pretty much how a gyroplane/autogyro works.
To quote Wikipedia...
"An autogyro is characterized by a free-spinning rotor that turns because of the passage of air through the rotor from below. The vertical (downward) component of the total aerodynamic reaction of the rotor gives lift for the vehicle, and sustains the autogyro in the air. A separate propeller provides forward thrust".
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018