Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forcesLinux, Windows redesign

On 1/6/2018 6:22 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Ron C
wrote:

My neighbor is a mechanic for a dealership. They send him to classes
for the latest updates and such. He's told some stories about the warnings
related to servicing electric cars. Most of the stories start with something
to the effect of "..if you touch THIS you're dead.."
Seems there's the potential for a lot of dead shade-tree mechanics, to say
nothing of the risks to EMTs responding to crashes.

if you touch the wrong thing in a gas vehicle you could be dead too.

Such as... ?

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

On 01/06/2018 06:22 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Ron C
wrote:

My neighbor is a mechanic for a dealership. They send him to classes
for the latest updates and such. He's told some stories about the warnings
related to servicing electric cars. Most of the stories start with something
to the effect of "..if you touch THIS you're dead.."
Seems there's the potential for a lot of dead shade-tree mechanics, to say
nothing of the risks to EMTs responding to crashes.

if you touch the wrong thing in a gas vehicle you could be dead too.


Having worked with both automobiles and electricity since my childhood
i think the electric has a much better chance of doing you in than the
average gasoline automobile.

bill

On 01/06/2018 06:22 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Bill Gunshannon
wrote:

I haven't looked
lately as I am not in the market for any kind of electric vehicle
but the last time I looked the all electrics I saw didn't even have
enough driving range for my daily commute.

how far is your daily commute?

you'd need to be driving on the order of 100 miles *each* way for it to
be an issue.


See my last post. My commute was 60-70 miles and the
majority of cars that normal working class people can
actually afford barely make that.

see my reply to that post.

while there are electric vehicles with very short range (for those who
don't drive very far), there are also models with greater range.

don't dismiss electric because you chose the wrong car.


Like most of us in the working class I can only choose from
the list of cars I can afford. Tesla is not on that list.

bill

In article , Bill Gunshannon
wrote:

My neighbor is a mechanic for a dealership. They send him to classes
for the latest updates and such. He's told some stories about the warnings
related to servicing electric cars. Most of the stories start with
something
to the effect of "..if you touch THIS you're dead.."
Seems there's the potential for a lot of dead shade-tree mechanics, to say
nothing of the risks to EMTs responding to crashes.

if you touch the wrong thing in a gas vehicle you could be dead too.


Having worked with both automobiles and electricity since my childhood
i think the electric has a much better chance of doing you in than the
average gasoline automobile.

there's essentially no maintenance on an electric vehicle, so no.

On 01/06/2018 06:22 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Bill Gunshannon
wrote:

The biggest problem in even considering a Tesla is that I live in a
very cold climate which, since mid-December, has seen its temperature
go no lower than -25c. In such a climate, the already poor range of an
electric car is even worse and there are good reasons to believe that
it wouldn't even start.

the batteries are heated in cold weather and the cars start just fine.

Are they heated through the use of a block heater or is there some
other solution I'm not aware of?

the batteries are heated and shortly before leaving, you can preheat
the cabin via a smartphone app.

And that heating shortens your range. Or did you think it was
somehow free?

it's effectively free. the impact is a few miles less range, out of
200-300 miles total. most trips are well under that, so it's not even
remotely a concern.

Say what?

Honda FitEV - 82 miles
KIA SoulEV - 93 miles
Mercedes Benz B-Class Electric Drive - 124 miles
Mitsubishi I-MiEV - 106 miles
Nissan Leaf - 75 miles
Smart electric Drive - 90 miles
Volkswagen e-Up - 99 miles
Chevy Spark EV - 82 miles
BMW i3 - 114 miles

http://fortune.com/2017/01/22/tesla-long-range-electric-car/
Without much fanfare, Tesla has added a new battery option to its
menu. The Model S 100D, currently listed at a base price of $92,500,
offers an EPA-rated range of 335 miles on a full charge, making it,
according to Autoblog, the longest-range consumer electric vehicle in
the world

https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/b...odel-3-vs-chev
rolet-bolt-ev/
The Tesla Model 3's base battery confers a 220-mile range, which is a
bit less than the Bolt EV's 238-mile range. The base Model 3 packs
better performance, though, hitting 60 mph in 5.6 seconds (versus
6.5-ish) and reaching a top speed of 130 mph (versus a paltry 93 mph).

Add the bigger battery, and the Tesla's numbers get better. Range
bumps up to 310 miles, the 0 to 60 time drops to 5.1 seconds and the
top speed extends to 140 mph.

Not everybody can afford a Tesla.

the tesla model 3 starts at $35k, comparable to many other vehicles.

there are also assorted credits for buying an electric vehicle, further
reducing the actual price.

Before I retired my daily commute was between 60 and 70 miles.

then it's not a problem at all.

Very
close for some of these cars without using some of that electricity
for heat. One detour because of an accident on the highway and I am
screwed.

not even remotely close.

And what do you think it will cost to have it flatbeded to
my house? Not to mention the wasted time, inconvenience and danger of
being stranded on the side of the road. especially in -20 temps.

about the same as flatbedding any other car.

it's a completely fabricated scenario.

Electric cars are about as ready for reality as autonomous cars.

autonomous vehicles are already on the road.


A scary thought to many of us.

bill

On 1/6/2018 6:31 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
On 01/06/2018 06:22 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Bill Gunshannon
wrote:

The biggest problem in even considering a Tesla is that I live
in a
very cold climate which, since mid-December, has seen its
temperature
go no lower than -25c. In such a climate, the already poor
range of an
electric car is even worse and there are good reasons to
believe that
it wouldn't even start.

the batteries are heated in cold weather and the cars start just
fine.

Are they heated through the use of a block heater or is there some
other solution I'm not aware of?

the batteries are heated and shortly before leaving, you can preheat
the cabin via a smartphone app.

And that heating shortens your range.* Or did you think it was
somehow free?

it's effectively free. the impact is a few miles less range, out of
200-300 miles total. most trips are well under that, so it's not even
remotely a concern.

Say what?

Honda FitEV - 82 miles
KIA SoulEV - 93 miles
Mercedes Benz B-Class Electric Drive - 124 miles
Mitsubishi I-MiEV - 106 miles
Nissan Leaf - 75 miles
Smart electric Drive - 90 miles
Volkswagen e-Up - 99 miles
Chevy Spark EV - 82 miles
BMW i3 - 114 miles

http://fortune.com/2017/01/22/tesla-long-range-electric-car/
** Without much fanfare, Tesla has added a new battery option to its
** menu. The Model S 100D, currently listed at a base price of $92,500,
** offers an EPA-rated range of 335 miles on a full charge, making it,
** according to Autoblog, the longest-range consumer electric vehicle in
** the world

https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/b...odel-3-vs-chev
rolet-bolt-ev/
** The Tesla Model 3's base battery confers a 220-mile range, which is a
** bit less than the Bolt EV's 238-mile range. The base Model 3 packs
** better performance, though, hitting 60 mph in 5.6 seconds (versus
** 6.5-ish) and reaching a top speed of 130 mph (versus a paltry 93 mph).

** Add the bigger battery, and the Tesla's numbers get better. Range
** bumps up to 310 miles, the 0 to 60 time drops to 5.1 seconds and the
** top speed extends to 140 mph.

Not everybody can afford a Tesla.

the tesla model 3 starts at $35k, comparable to many other vehicles.

there are also assorted credits for buying an electric vehicle, further
reducing the actual price.

Before I retired my daily commute was between 60 and 70 miles.

then it's not a problem at all.

Very
close for some of these cars without using some of that electricity
for heat.* One detour because of an accident on the highway and I am
screwed.

not even remotely close.

And what do you think it will cost to have it flatbeded to
my house?* Not to mention the wasted time, inconvenience and danger of
being stranded on the side of the road.* especially in -20 temps.

about the same as flatbedding any other car.

it's a completely fabricated scenario.

Electric cars are about as ready for reality as autonomous cars.

autonomous vehicles are already on the road.


A scary thought to many of us.

bill

As noted by the [security bug] thread from which we've deviated.
--
==
Later...
Ron C
--


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

In article , Bill Gunshannon
wrote:


Like most of us in the working class I can only choose from
the list of cars I can afford. Tesla is not on that list.

for now.

the prices of electric vehicles continues to drop.

In article , Bill Gunshannon
wrote:

Electric cars are about as ready for reality as autonomous cars.

autonomous vehicles are already on the road.

A scary thought to many of us.

only those who fear the unknown.

just about every collision is due to human error. remove the human
factor and the crash, injury and fatality rate will drop.

an autonomous vehicle only has to be a better driver than a human,
which is sadly, not that difficult.

autonomous vehicles eliminate drunk driving, texting, being too tired,
being too old, driving too fast for conditions, etc.

autonomous vehicles can't happen soon enough.

On 1/6/2018 6:38 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Bill Gunshannon
wrote:

Electric cars are about as ready for reality as autonomous cars.

autonomous vehicles are already on the road.

A scary thought to many of us.

only those who fear the unknown.

just about every collision is due to human error. remove the human
factor and the crash, injury and fatality rate will drop.

an autonomous vehicle only has to be a better driver than a human,
which is sadly, not that difficult.

autonomous vehicles eliminate drunk driving, texting, being too tired,
being too old, driving too fast for conditions, etc.

autonomous vehicles can't happen soon enough.

And yet "they" can't even have trains travel at a safe speed!
[ Yes, the technology exists ...but? ]
--
==
Later...
Ron C
--


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

In article , Ron C
wrote:

just about every collision is due to human error. remove the human
factor and the crash, injury and fatality rate will drop.

an autonomous vehicle only has to be a better driver than a human,
which is sadly, not that difficult.

autonomous vehicles eliminate drunk driving, texting, being too tired,
being too old, driving too fast for conditions, etc.

autonomous vehicles can't happen soon enough.

And yet "they" can't even have trains travel at a safe speed!
[ Yes, the technology exists ...but? ]

yes they can.

if you're referring to the recent amtrak derailment, unfortunately, ptc
was not used. that was very clearly human error, one which could have
been avoided had it been used.

On 1/6/2018 6:50 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Ron C
wrote:

just about every collision is due to human error. remove the human
factor and the crash, injury and fatality rate will drop.

an autonomous vehicle only has to be a better driver than a human,
which is sadly, not that difficult.

autonomous vehicles eliminate drunk driving, texting, being too tired,
being too old, driving too fast for conditions, etc.

autonomous vehicles can't happen soon enough.

And yet "they" can't even have trains travel at a safe speed!
[ Yes, the technology exists ...but? ]

yes they can.

if you're referring to the recent amtrak derailment, unfortunately, ptc
was not used. that was very clearly human error, one which could have
been avoided had it been used.

....and you believe cars will reach a higher standard?
Reality check .. anyone?
--
==
L...
RC
--


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

In article
Tim Streater wrote:

In article , Scott Dorsey
wrote:

Tim Streater wrote:
In article , nospam
range is only a problem for long road trips, and in those cases, rent a
vehicle. eventually, that won't be a problem, as more charging stations
are built.

I think some of you guys need to calculate the power rate needed to
charge the higher range cars in any sort of reasonable time. You'll
find it quite high. Then you have the problem of supplying that power
at a safe voltage, and without such a high current needed that even Mr
Muscles can't lift the charging cable, never mind plug it in.

It's not that bad, one or two cars at a time. These days it's not unusual
at all for houses to have 200A service and putting a 100A 240V outlet in
the garage for a charger does not require a major retrofit.

Garage ha ha ha. That'll work a treat on those streets of terraced
houses, eh?

A 50kWh battery is going to need 100A at 1kV to charge up in 30 mins.
You going to give the punter a cable at 1kV to shove in their car?


Off-Topic in the privacy group.

In article , Ron C
wrote:

autonomous vehicles can't happen soon enough.

And yet "they" can't even have trains travel at a safe speed!
[ Yes, the technology exists ...but? ]

yes they can.

if you're referring to the recent amtrak derailment, unfortunately, ptc
was not used. that was very clearly human error, one which could have
been avoided had it been used.

...and you believe cars will reach a higher standard?

absolutely.

all they need to do is be better than humans, which as i said, is not
that tough.

On 1/6/2018 6:59 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Ron C
wrote:

autonomous vehicles can't happen soon enough.

And yet "they" can't even have trains travel at a safe speed!
[ Yes, the technology exists ...but? ]

yes they can.

if you're referring to the recent amtrak derailment, unfortunately, ptc
was not used. that was very clearly human error, one which could have
been avoided had it been used.

...and you believe cars will reach a higher standard?

absolutely.

all they need to do is be better than humans, which as i said, is not
that tough.

And yet we have this [many decades old] memory leak security hole.
--
==
L...
RC
--


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

On 2018-01-06 23:34, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Johnny Billquist
wrote:

On 2018-01-06 19:23, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Johnny Billquist
wrote:

And then they figured out a clever way of mining the contents of the
cache.

One could argue that the cache should be invalidated in such a
scenario, but that is not happening either.

Never mind invalidating it. WTF is going on if a non-priv process has
the right to do anything at all to the cache? Non-priv processes
shouldn't even be aware that there *is* a cache, never mind having the
right to execute instructions *about* the cache.

Normally, that is true. But clever people can do a lot around this.
When I was doing my CS major, we had a course on advanced computer
architectures, in where we learned how to write a very simple program
that told us everything about cache size, associativeness, line size,
TLB size, TLB associativeness, and so on...
All you need to do is understand how the computer is affected by these
things, and then write programs that detect the effects.

In short, you write small loops that exercise the cache in different
ways, and time the whole thing. You don't even need any high precision
timers for it. All user level, and all very simple.

Does that involve instructions that operate on the cache. Such as
"clear cache"?

Nope.
It's easy to "clear" the cache with normal code. Just force something
else into it.

Johnny

--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol