LTT has a video where they tried to see how many PCIe riser cables they could string together before it stopped working.[1] They got to several meters. Maybe you could argue that it's worse inside a PC case since there's more EMI, but it seems like your PCIe riser cable would have to be very out of spec before you'd notice anything.
I wonder if that benchmark actually loaded the PCIe bus to any significant degree after the initial benchmark startup, or just updated a couple small parameters on a single scene and thus mainly just tested the local computation on the GPU?
You'd want to somehow monitor the PCIe bus error rate - with a marginal signal and lots of errors -> retries, something that loads the bus harder (loading new textures etc) could suffer way more.
They do briefly show a different PCIe riser made out of generic ribbon cable [1, 3:27], and say that one failed after chaining only two ~200mm lengths. The quality of the riser cable certainly matters.
You need Steve for that kind of testing, LTT would be busy putting rgb on it and then (badly) water cooling it so they could sell you a backpack with no warranty.
It's not clear whether they reached a limit of drive strength or latency (I doubt EMI is the factor, since he said those are shielded) but that's a good demonstration of the resiliency of self-clocked differential serial (and aggregated serial) buses. The technology is much closer to networking standards like Ethernet than traditional parallel PCI, with features like built-in checksums, error correction (newer versions), and automatic retransmit.
The 650 Ti is PCIe 3.0. PCIe 4.0 doubles the bandwidth. PCIe 5.0 doubles the bandwidth again. The RTX 40 series GPUs still use PCIe 4.0, which have commonly available conformant riser cables. I suspect the story for PCIe 5.0 will be different.
It might have to do with the USB buffer on the Ender. If the buffer is too small (e.g. 4 gcode commands or so) then when the buffer is filled with commands that execute very quickly, its possible for the printer to empty the buffer before new commands come down the pipeline from Octoprint. This causes the printer to stop the printhead sharply, which can cause quality issues on prints, or maybe even print failure if the sudden stop causes the print to detach from the bed.
[You can fix this if you're using Marlin](https://www.reddit.com/r/ender3/comments/btjk22/octoprint_is...), since Marlin allows you to configure the buffer size. Generally more buffer is better, but do be aware that increasing the buffer size will cause the printer to be less responsive to the "stop print" command on octoprint (since the printer will continue executing the commands that have been buffered).
Just to clarify, that means that I would need to 1.) purchase some packs of Kong, which are unloaded, and then 2.) participate in a lockdrop to gain the tokens with which to load the Kong? Seems fine and dandy wrt the acquisition of bills, but how will adoption by vendors happen?
Question: since bills can be either loaded or unloaded (either because they haven't been put in circulation yet, or because they're counterfeit), doesn't that mean that e.g. a vendor taking my Kong who has no trust in me would have to individually check each bill via NFC or i2c to make sure that the contract backing the bill is valid (and the correct amount, etc.)? And that I would have to do the same for all the bills I get back as change? As a completely trustless transaction, this seems like it could be entirely too slow for most applications, without some kind of device to quickly verify multiple bills.
Ideally you should check every Kong note. In reality behavior would probably be similar how bills are verified now; businesses regularly check $100 and $50 notes under backlights and with special pens but don't worry about lower denominations.
A dedicated "Kong scanner" could do this very quickly.
Is it riffing off ranch dressing? I've heard that ranch is associated with the US, outside of the US.
Edit: looks like "american sauce" can refer to a multitude of things. Typically it seems to either be some kind of ranch or thousand island.[1] Both of which are separate from "Sauce Americaine", from French cuisine.[2]
2nd edit: If the OP is talking specifically about Heinz brand "American Sauce", apparently the closest match in American cuisine is either thousand island or big mac sauce/"secret sauce" used on burgers (which is based on thousand island). It is pretty American, come to think of it.
Digging a little deeper it appears like McDonalds may have actually invented the sauce to appeal to the Dutch market, where fritessaus is popular (instead of tomato ketchup). Because McDonalds is American, their take on fritessaus grew into it's own thing called "American Fritessaus," or simply "American Saus."
Interestingly, Fry Sauce[0] is near ubiquitous in Utah (and no other US state as far as I know). You can find it on offer just about anywhere in Utah that sells fries.
It's probably the fiber content, if I had to guess. Fiber is really good at making you feel full, which is why psyllium husk is sold as a dietary supplement.
When I first read your comment, I thought that there was no way that solar panels could be heavy enough to affect your mileage. So I did some quick calculations.
Estimates of solar panel weight I found say that solar panels tend to weigh 2-4 lb per sqft.[1] Note that estimate is for roof-mounted solar panels, but if anything, car-based solar panels should be lighter.
A Prius has dimensions of 180"x69".[2] The sqft of the solar panels will be less than that, since the panels don't cover the windshield, and they don't go all the way to the edge of the hood, etc. That's 86.25 sqft, so that puts an upper bound on the weight of the solar panels at 345 lb. If we assume the lighter end of the scale for solar panel weight, that becomes 172.5 lb. That's 6-11% of the curb weight of a Prius. That's pretty substantial! For reference, a 50 lb spare tire kit can reduce fuel economy (and presumably mileage, for EVs) by 1%.[3]
Although that does imply that you're breaking even if the solar panels can increase your range by ~5%, not accounting for the weight. If you live somewhere like Arizona, that might work out. If you live in Seattle, maybe not.
These are thin-film, light-weight, and flexible. Hanergy owned Alta Devices has a Gallium Arsenide lift-off process that produces the world-record efficiency for single junction PV.
172lb is a lot! Thanks for doing that. But I think solar panels meant for rooftops have a lot of weight in the aluminium frame, and are think glass. I can't imagine a car manufacturer putting thick glass above the aluminium skin of the car if they didn't have to.
Maybe we'll get cool solar panel crystal car roofs in the future!
That's fine, because when something breaks the day after you've pushed, it's Friday and everyone's in the office. People are still going to rush the deadline, but putting the deadline earlier means you have time to deal with stuff that breaks after the deadline.
> Never heard of it, never thought about it, not sure why proving/disproving this is in the author's interest.
It is in Huawei's interest to not be labelled as a state-owned or state-controlled actor. The perception of being controlled by the Chinese state is precisely why many western countries are leaning away from purchasing Huawei networking equipment for their up and coming 5G networks, and also (at least in the case of the US) advising against, and then banning, consumer electronics made by Huawei. Huawei has been trying to convince the public that it is in fact employee owned and therefore not controlled by the Chinese state by touting its "employee virtual ownership program", and the purpose of this paper appears to be to dispel that notion.
Proving significant state ownership should be the goal then. Doesn't have to be majority. Maybe 15-30%?
Chinese state owns some of most Chinese companies. Some passive through the central bank open market operations, some more direct and controlling.
So it is almost like trying to prove a negative, with Chinese companies, but if we really want to dive deeper on this particular issuance, the opaque trade union governance is a nice tip of the iceberg.
I just think it is such a weird assertion to start with.
"Miller and Valasek’s full arsenal includes functions that at lower speeds fully kill the engine, abruptly engage the brakes, or disable them altogether. The most disturbing maneuver came when they cut the Jeep's brakes, leaving me frantically pumping the pedal as the 2-ton SUV slid uncontrollably into a ditch. The researchers say they're working on perfecting their steering control—for now they can only hijack the wheel when the Jeep is in reverse. Their hack enables surveillance too: They can track a targeted Jeep's GPS coordinates, measure its speed, and even drop pins on a map to trace its route."[1]
The wheel control only working in reverse kind of makes sense. They're probably using some kind of self-park feature to control the wheel, and some engineer (sensibly) put in some kind of interlock to prevent the wheel from moving on its own when travelling at speed.
The wording of the article implies that these particular attacks only work when the car is travelling at low speed, but earlier in the article they did mention that they could (and did!) throw the transmission into neutral while the Jeep was driving on the highway. The driver was unable to recover without turning the car off and back on again.
In a followup a year later, they showed that they were able to do these attacks at any speed, including turning the steering wheel.[2]
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5xvwPa3r7M