|
Liquid Nitrogen is such a cool answer to almost any question.
I submit that any question that cannot be answered with "Liquid Nitrogen" be banned.
(note I didn't phrase this post as a question).
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
does anybody know what I need indoor to make my RC car be able to make it run threw a computer and driving it by using a computer. what device will I need to put on my RC car inodor to make it run by programming it with a computer. I would like to drive the RC car from my computer.
does anybody buddy know how to do something like that.
thanks,
from tolyrhoads 
|
|
|
|
|
What have you tried?
What do you have besides an RC car and a computer? Most likely some microcomputer (PI, Arduino...)
Have you tried Google: Computer Controlled RC Car?
Director of Transmogrification Services
Shinobi of Query Language
Master of Yoda Conditional
|
|
|
|
|
Probably overkill, but for everything that flies, swims or rolls around: ArduPilot Open Source Autopilot[^]
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
|
|
|
|
|
You can either hook to your remote or to your RC car. I would guess that hooking to your remote is easier - it probably only requires rewiring switches that are triggered by buttons on the remote to pins of your board (for example: Raspberry PI) and reusing the rest.
Hooking to your RC car seems way more fun. For hackers. For that you'll need something small, with WiFi. Like a 3$ Wemos D1 Mini. You'll have to add some electronics to correctly connect the servos / signals from the decoder to your chip pins. And you'll need your software.
And then ... you can have a REST service for driving your car. And having hi-speed WiFi connection allows you to hook up a camera and transmit live video back to the computer. If having your own 3D racer experience is not fun enough -- you can do convolution neural net detection and segmentation on your PC and let it drive itself.
: and there goes your marriage :
|
|
|
|
|
Tomaž Štih wrote: and there goes your marriage
What marriage? He lives in his mom's basement.
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
On my home computer, I use any of three different browsers: Edge, IE, and Chrome. For the first two, browsing is as normal as it gets. I can request a page from either the Run box, or type it into the address bar if the browser is already open. Either way, pages are loaded and rendered as fast as expected. For Chrome, however, it's borderline frustrating. If it's already up and running, requesting a page behaves normally just like the other two browsers. If not, I'm staring at a blank window and it takes 30-40 seconds for Chrome to finish doing whatever it is that it's doing (?) before the page loads and renders. Subsequent page requests are fine, until I close Chrome and request a page later on, even if just a few seconds, then it starts all over.
Things were not always this way. Previously, I had been on DSL Extreme's Standard DSL package, using my own modem and router. All browsers behaved properly at that point. When I switched to their trueSTREAM package, it required using an AT&T-branded (U-verse) Pace router. Once that was up and going, Chrome started misbehaving.
What is it about this scenario that makes Chrome so unique? I've changed DNS servers from those at DSL Extreme to the ones at Google. Neither make a difference. This sort of thing is not in my wheelhouse so tracking down what Chrome is actually doing while I'm waiting is where I just start scratching my head.
Thanks.
DC
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
|
|
|
|
|
Have you tried using a packet sniffer to analyse the problem?
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
One of the first things Chrome does at startup is generate a random string and query your DNS server to see if the DNS server pretends to be authoritive for the randomly generated domain name. If the DNS server does give an authoritive response... it generates another random string and performs the test again.
I believe it performs the test three times to check for DNS Hijacking[^]. On a 'positive test' Chrome will perform some additional tests against Google servers.
I don't know if this is causing your problem. You should be able to debug this within a few minutes by inspecting your network traffic.
Best Wishes,
-David Delaune
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, David. Is this what you are referring to?
If so, wouldn't I be experiencing the same thing with my work computer that also uses Chrome (exclusively)?  There's no lag there.
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
modified 7-Dec-17 22:08pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes.
Btw... on some domain-joined Microsoft Windows machines it will also cause additional latency by performing both LLMNR and NBTNS lookups.
Quote: If so, wouldn't I be experiencing the same thing with my work computer that also uses Chrome (exclusively)?
No, not necessarily. If the DNS server responds with NXDOMAIN (which is what Chrome expects) then Chrome continues without any further security tests.
Best Wishes,
-David Delaune
|
|
|
|
|
Even if not the problem here that information is interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
So I'm creating an app for a neighbor and we're on the subject of hosting.
He knows a guy who can get him a (probably virtual) server for €x per month.
I know a Microsoft who has everything he needs, and more, for now and in the future, in Azure, which is way easier for me (and possibly cheaper for him).
I'm no Azure expert, but I don't feel like installing and maintaining an entire server just for a single app .NET Core web app and SQL Server database.
Azure seems nice and easy enough 
I'm thinking an S1 App Service and S1 SQL Server database, optionally with Application Insights because that's pretty nice to have.
Experiences?
|
|
|
|
|
If you don't need reports, consider an Azure Web App. You could probably get away with the free shared tier. 
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hello,
Azure App service and Azure SQL are the way to go, no worries with maintenance and so easy to deploy, integrate with VS, production/staging slot etc... It is the future. VMs are to be used for more complex scenarios.
Just one thing, if it is for your neighbour I suspect it's not going to be a very demanding app in which case I would not use an S1 instance but rather a Shared D1 or maybe just a free F1.
The D1 costs €0.011 as opposed to €0.085/hour for the S1.
Also regarding SQL server you may want to choose a small basic instance which costs €0.0851/hour
If needed you can always scale up in no time, that's the beauty of Azure!
Anyway, I think it works out to be about 70 euro a month.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: So I'm creating an app for a neighbor and we're on the subject of hosting.
Experiences?
Is he paying you? Does he fix your plumbing or car for free? Is his child going to marry your child? Does he have a lot of guns and anger issues?
If the answer to all of those is no then do it however you want.
And most importantly if you are going to be the one maintaining it forever then definitely do it the way you want.
|
|
|
|
|
jschell wrote: And most importantly if you are going to be the one maintaining it forever then definitely do it the way you want.
Amen 
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh hell yes he's paying me.
I'm not stupid
|
|
|
|
|
You want him to entrust his personal info to the safekeeping of a company that invented Bob? The only cloud I'll ever trust is the one that condenses in the bathroom while I shower.
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
User: Technical term used by developers. See Idiot.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure, from a safety point of view, that Microsoft has a lot more in place than some "Mike" who can host me a server.
Buying your own server is the most expensive and most difficult solution BY FAR and scales really bad.
You can stay paranoid or you can get with the times.
|
|
|
|
|
App - You mean a Mobile app that consumes .net Web-Apis from Azure?
Or an Asp.net web App?
On any case, Azure WebApp + Azure SQL does a real decent job.
The very basic ones does cater to a very decent number of client calls + there's a lot of perf metrics available on the dashboard. You can monitor them live. it's amazing.
& setting up custom domains + CORS + Diagnostics, logs are all piece of cake
And you can easily add Schedulers, Jobs to your WebApp. They costs less too.
SQL -the basic standard one (Lowest one) does okay, but the response speed would be slower, even for a normal query. You'll have to pick and choose the right BOX after doing some performance tests.
You can just switch the boxes in minutes, all these work in pro-rata basis. So you wont be billed heavily just because you tested a higher config SQL boxes for few mins.
And soon you'll land in a requirement that expects you to store something in File format.
Azure blobs would be just few clicks away. They are one of the most useful things I've used on a server.
And most important point - I've never had any kinds of DDos attacks in Azure (touchwood!).
Not sure why, but it's happened in all the other non-cloud service providers I've used like goDaddy, Hostgator etc. And these guys simply lock your site without consulting you.
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy Falcon.
|
|
|
|
|
I'd go with Azure. You can scale up/out in future, add more services etc. with relative ease.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
