51–60 of 61 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Refuel every 1000km... I envy you. Could you share some details, as it made me curious ?
Audi A6 diesel (yes very much a dirty VW/Audi diesel-gate diesel, although supposedly "fixed" now). It does 40-45 mpg US (5.5-6L/100km) and the tank is just bottomless (17 gallons/65L or something?) > I envy you. Still envy me when I say a full tank is $100? :)
Good article, but actually understates the problem. It's not just that nonsecurity updates are appropriately due lesser attention. It's that they are appropriately due negative attention. My computer works fine the way it is. I actively do not want it screwed around with. I make a necessary exception for security updates. To put anything other than a security update into that channel is an abuse of trust that was granted for an important purpose, and trust that is abused is liable to be lost.
I'll admit to putting off applying security patches because my laptop is a giant repository of state and it's a pita to bring it all back up again. I have to remember how to start postgres, the erb command to make rails work, figure out how my upgrade to bash subtly broke virtualenvwrapper, make sure I didn't accidentally leave anything open in vim in some random window or go through the whining about vim swap files,…
Solution for you: more frequent updates. Breaks less stuff at a time.
The biggest change will not come from getting users to upgrade, it will come from producing higher quality software in the first place.
Sure, but if we're in dreamland, then I think the second biggest factor will be making security upgrades invisible to users. If you could ensure that you can upgrade any part of your OS/application while it's running, without ever requiring a reboot, then the problem disappears as you can simply stop asking people when they want a security patch. In terms of safety, not much good comes from asking people. (That, or l…
Keeps everyone happy and dramatically improves compliance.
Software updates: Is the car running right or is there an issue?
Safety recalls: We're obsessed with the dog-whistle safety, but like anything else, there are trade-offs. Our Honda got recalled for the airbag inflators and I waited a few months before eventually taking it in. Result: No one died. I also have one car that has no airbags at all. I feel fine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oops, no, I recently migrated to a static site generator and some posts broke. I'll fix it now, thanks Jacques. EDIT: Phew, fixed, good catch, thanks. There was a triple dash in the article, which Lektor interpreted as the end of the post :/
Hehe, one of those painless migrations ;) At least you found the cause.
While I totally agree with most of the article, it made me grind my teeth at the frequency the author changes the oil in their car... That poor valvetrain will be full of gummy carbon deposits. RIP whoever buys the car second-hand.
I always wondered how this oil-change scam still continues in the US. Modern cars with synthetic oils don't need an oil change every 3-4 months or 3000 miles. I always changed the oil according to the (European or Japanese) manufacturer's schedule (once a year / every 10-15000km) and had no issues with the cars (even >10 years old cars).
Having pulled the tops off more engines than I could count, you can immediately tell an engine that gets regular oil flushes compared to one thats run on longer intervals. Sure, the engine might last your whole ownership without having a serious issue... But inside it'll probably tell a different story.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How would changing oil every 2 000 km be a problem? Modern oil should last 10x that long without any problem. I am used to having recommendations for changing oil once a year or every 15k km depending on what comes first. I remember recommendations to change 2 times a year 15-20 years ago because it back then was more normal to have different viscosity in summer and winter
The sticky sludge that GP refers to is for the most part an emulsion of water, produced by combustion and/or from ambient humidity, and oil. If an engine is not run frequently or is used only for short intervals the water isn't driven off by engine heat. Engines that aren't run much must be maintained based on elapsed time, not duration of use, due to factors such as this. The author's vehicle is a prime sludge candi…
I change my oil religiously, but I ignore safety recalls because I hate going to dealerships.
There have been news stories about this too, e.g. https://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/dec/17/us-drivers-str...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Solution for you: more frequent updates. Breaks less stuff at a time.
But breaks stuff more often. Why would that be a net win? Probably a net loss because you incur the mental overhead of putting down whatever actual problems you are trying to solve and getting into a frame of mind to try to fix your computer, more frequently.
1) update rarely, fix a lot of breakage at a time
2) update daily, run into each breakage as soon as it happens and fix it
3) never update, no need to fix anything