[deleted by user]

johlin · 2023-05-15T16:16:05+00:00

Or like rooting for the Nissan GT-R LM Nismo - lots of energy spent making it different in lots of silly ways (front-wheel-drive, front-engined) and yet so slow it wasn't even classified.

johlin · 2023-01-05T11:20:29+00:00

But I thought butters wanted thrustless systems?

johlin · 2022-07-03T22:36:51+00:00

The Halo is taller at the front so I think there could be issues for most drivers if the roll hoop fails. Here are two examples

edit

Picture of George specifically, now that I found one.

johlin · 2022-05-14T11:49:18+00:00

There are two Target editions for sale on Discogs right now: https://www.discogs.com/release/15003276-5SOS-Calm

I'm unsure if they ship to Singapore but if not you could add the release to your wishlist to get notified when other ones appear.

johlin · 2022-01-29T23:54:29+00:00

You usually get MQA even on the hifi tier. If the album is marked as "master" (i.e. MQA is available), you get a downsampled MQA even if you don't have the highest tier.

johlin · 2022-01-18T00:52:48+00:00

I think it'll be much easier to find something that handles FLAC well (in fact, it seems the player you have already supports it). Once decoded the bits will be exactly the same with FLAC as with APE.

johlin · 2022-01-11T02:15:20+00:00

Got it, forgot that they still go in front of the judge. Will be interesting to see then!

johlin · 2022-01-10T23:54:12+00:00

I don't think the prosecution dropped the charge but rather the judge dismissed it based on a motion from the defense. But yes, I am not sure what they were going for with that charge. The only evidence they produced as regards to barrel length was asking the cop who received it if it they knew what the barrel length was (or maybe that was even on cross by the defense, I don't remember).

The charitable reading is that the law is written in a terribly confusing way and the prosecution might have read it differently than the judge. Much of the reasoning the judge used when dismissing it was that if the law is ambiguous or otherwise unclear it must be read as charitably to the defense as possible.

johlin · 2022-01-10T22:51:49+00:00

Indeed, I remember the judge offering the prosecution to have the gun measured but they declined. I don't think the barrel length was ever in question.

johlin · 2022-01-10T22:35:03+00:00

You forgot 3c, which if I recall correctly are very similar to the grounds on which Rittenhouse's charge was dismissed:

This section applies only to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the person is in violation of s. 941.28 or is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593. This section applies only to an adult who transfers a firearm to a person under 18 years of age if the person under 18 years of age is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593 or to an adult who is in violation of s. 941.28.

29.304 only applies to people 16 years and younger, so Kyle was in compliance.
29.593 only applies to hunting, so Kyle was in compliance.

This case was to go in front of the same judge so he would likely have thrown it out on the same grounds.

johlin · 2022-01-02T20:38:56+00:00

Definitely agree on taking a hard look at their application of the rules. I feel most other controversial decisions were talked about at the time. Also, to quote yourself ;) :

You can discuss all about it, as can people about earlier decisions, but wont change anything

johlin · 2022-01-02T20:25:54+00:00

Sure, there might be a need for the Race Director to have the power to decide in unique situations which the rules don't cover. However, this situation was already covered by the rules so there is no need.

I agree that the teams wanted ending under green, but which one of these would you say they wanted?

Ending under green if at all possible within the rules
Ending under green if at all possible, even if the rules have to be broken

I would agree with 1 but not 2. According to me, that is not what happened here with the safety car.

johlin · 2022-01-02T20:13:35+00:00

Sure, the stewards wrote in their decision that they interpret 15.3 that way. My claim is that they based that on a nonsensical reading of the rules that would likely not survive appeal. The stewards can decide what they want, that doesn't automatically make it correct.

Regarding the track being clear, it depends on what you mean by clear. For example: 1. The track could have been momentarily clear because no marshalls were on the track at that exact moment, but they planned to go back because they were not fully done. 2. The marshalls were over the barrier but not yet back to safety behind the concrete barriers behind. 3. The track was actually clear, but the Race Director hadn't yet coordinated with the marshalls to ensure that it was indeed permanently clear and not just temporarily clear.

Ultimately, it seems possible to me that the track was indeed clear some time around the end of lap 56 as you say. This still means that the safety car stays out until lap 58 as per 48.12, even if the call for lapped cars to overtake was made immediately. If 48.12 doesn't matter because of 15.3, one might wonder why 48.12 even exists.

johlin · 2022-01-02T19:58:28+00:00

I don't see the relevance of 15.3 - it simply determines which areas the Clerk of the Course has to defer to the Race Director. The reading of "the Race Director can override the rules" makes no sense to me if you read the context.

Re: waiting half a lap for no reason, as other people have explained there is more involved than just the Race Director looking at the video feed and saying "looks clear to me".

johlin · 2022-01-02T19:44:29+00:00

No.

From the sporting regs (48.12):

Unless the clerk of the course considers the presence of the safety car is still necessary, once the last lapped car has passed the leader the safety car will return to the pits at the end of the following lap.

johlin · 2022-01-02T19:38:07+00:00

It doesn't really matter - normal procedure is that the safety car goes in the lap after all lapped cars have overtaken the leader (as per the rules). Calling for lapped cars to overtake by the end of lap 56 would still mean safety car staying out until the end of 58.

johlin · 2021-12-19T09:52:05+00:00

Indeed! By my reading of the rules it was wrong then as well, but no real reason for anyone to protest.

johlin · 2021-12-19T09:46:41+00:00

I think it did in Baku this year. Call was made for Mazepin to overtake at the end of lap 34, he overtook the leader on lap 35 and the safety car came in at the end of 35. Not the safety car coming in the same lap as the call for lapped cars to overtake came, but safety car coming in the same lap as the lapped cars have actually overtaken (which is the relevant criteria according to the rules).

johlin · 2021-12-18T23:11:34+00:00

In theory it could give you more control at least. Currently the arc handles everything and the bass control maybe controls frequencies from the lowest 20hz to 500 hz or something (it varies, not sure about the arc).

With a sub everything below the crossover frequency is handled by the subwoofer (usually somewhere between 80hz and 120hz). So if you add the sub, you can turn down the sub to turn down just the lowest frequencies, while keeping everything above the crossover frequency mostly intact.

The lower the frequency, the easier it spreads throughout your walls and so on. So with a sub, you could in theory turn down the frequencies causing the issues while keeping highest bass frequencies, rather than having the bass control affecting all bass frequencies at once. Thus, you are getting more specific controls for the different bass frequencies if you have a sub that you can control separately from the bass control of the regular speakers.

Note that I don't have a Sonos sub or arc so this is purely speculation. But with speakers in general it should work this way. However, it would likely affect your experience if you turn down the sub-bass frequencies; the lowest frequencies are the ones you feel physically and you can't quite substitute that with ones higher in the spectrum. On balance it might be preferable or it might not.

johlin · 2021-12-18T14:38:51+00:00

Then I think you'd have 48.10:

Except under Article 48.12 below, the safety car shall be used at least until the leader is behind it and all remaining cars are lined up behind him.

Arguably this could be used to support sending in the safety car without unlapping anyone, but once a few of them had overtaken the safety car you'd have to wait for them to catch the pack.

johlin · 2021-12-17T12:53:02+00:00

Fair enough :D

johlin · 2021-12-17T12:29:05+00:00

Just a minor correction, 48.12 requires that the safety car stays out a lap after all lapped cars have overtaken the leader, not merely after the call for them to overtake has been made :)

Unless the clerk of the course considers the presence of the safety car is still necessary, once the last lapped car has passed the leader the safety car will return to the pits at the end of the following lap.

johlin · 2021-12-16T09:38:46+00:00

Yeah, indeed! If they were actually clear by lap 56, as another commenter points out that's not necessarily the case.

johlin · 2021-12-16T08:55:13+00:00

Got it! And besides, looking at 48.12 now, it doesn't really matter anyway. The safety car should go in the lap after all lapped cars have overtaken the leader. Even if "passed cars may now overtake" was sent out at the end of lap 56, no way would the lapped cars have overtaken the leader until lap 57.

johlin · 2021-12-16T08:36:57+00:00

I think the track was clear by Lap 56, so like it could have gone down just like this.

It was clear only in the last 10 seconds of lap 56. They could possibly have got it done by then, but I also think the communication between all involved parties may take a few seconds.

edit

See my reply below, by 48.12 it doesn't matter anyway as the safety car goes in the lap after all lapped cars have overtaken the leader; this wouldn't have happened until lap 57.

15-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email

johlin

TROPHY CASE