Slashdot Mirror

Heraklit writes "As reported on Heise News, the Frauenhofer Institute of Computer Architecture and Software Technology has made available the first online quantum computer simulator - it will be simulating up to 31 quantum bits, for testing new advanced quantum algorithms. Behind the scenes, it is a 32 node Athlon 3200 Myrinet Linux Cluster with 56GByte RAM! Now imagine the computing power of a few hundred qubits, if ever constructed..."

prostoalex writes "Researchers from Humboldt University found a way to build self-assembling networks. By emulating the behavior of ants and insects the team, which is led by Frank Schweitzer, demonstrated a simulation where agent-based architecture was able to quickly assemble itself into a network and quickly react to a broken link or damages. Schweitzer's research papers are available off his personal Web site. The scientific paper referred in the original article, Self-Assembling of Networks in an Agent-Based Model is available off Cornell server."

Lynx writes "As the german magazine Spiegel reports, scientists at the Fraunhofer Institute for Ceramic Technologies have developed a transparent tile made from aluminium oxide pellets baked at 1200C. The material is very hard, and could be used as bulletproof windows." Use the fish.

My eagerly awaited copy of C'T has arrived, and in it there is a short interview with Martin Sieler, multimedia software lead at the Fraunhofer Institute. The topic was Fraunhofer's demand for patent license fees on free MP3 encoders. In it Sieler disputes that the encoders were free because the internet sites distributing them made money on the banner advertisements. He also discusses the newest MPEG standard (MPEG-2 Advanced Audio Coding -- also to be in MPEG-4): a refinement of the MPEG-1 layer 3 technology (MP3), it will provide even higher compression rates for the same audio quality. As with MP3 unlicensed encoders will be illegal, but unlike MP3 no free decoders will be tolerated... S: I find the ISO's current trend of accepting standards which cannot be implemented without violating patents worrisome. While I agree with some readers that a lot of work goes into this type of research I disagree that the key elements are inventions: they are discoveries about how human perception works. As a result, an unrestricted alternative (like gzip was to pkzip) should not only be possible, but encouraged. What do you think? I've corrected MPEG-3 to MPEG-1 Layer 3. Thanks manuka for your correction. I've also corrected the "like gzip" statement to "like gzip was to pkzip" since it seems to be causing some confusion. Finally thanks to Christian who pointed out I forgot the u in Fraunhofer. Oops.

My eagerly awaited copy of C'T has arrived, and in it there is a short interview with Martin Sieler, multimedia software lead at the Fraunhofer Institute. The topic was Fraunhofer's demand for patent license fees on free MP3 encoders. In it Sieler disputes that the encoders were free because the internet sites distributing them made money on the banner advertisements. He also discusses the newest MPEG standard (MPEG-2 Advanced Audio Coding -- also to be in MPEG-4): a refinement of the MPEG-1 layer 3 technology (MP3), it will provide even higher compression rates for the same audio quality. As with MP3 unlicensed encoders will be illegal, but unlike MP3 no free decoders will be tolerated... S: I find the ISO's current trend of accepting standards which cannot be implemented without violating patents worrisome. While I agree with some readers that a lot of work goes into this type of research I disagree that the key elements are inventions: they are discoveries about how human perception works. As a result, an unrestricted alternative (like gzip was to pkzip) should not only be possible, but encouraged. What do you think? I've corrected MPEG-3 to MPEG-1 Layer 3. Thanks manuka for your correction. I've also corrected the "like gzip" statement to "like gzip was to pkzip" since it seems to be causing some confusion. Finally thanks to Christian who pointed out I forgot the u in Fraunhofer. Oops.

My eagerly awaited copy of C'T has arrived, and in it there is a short interview with Martin Sieler, multimedia software lead at the Fraunhofer Institute. The topic was Fraunhofer's demand for patent license fees on free MP3 encoders. In it Sieler disputes that the encoders were free because the internet sites distributing them made money on the banner advertisements. He also discusses the newest MPEG standard (MPEG-2 Advanced Audio Coding -- also to be in MPEG-4): a refinement of the MPEG-1 layer 3 technology (MP3), it will provide even higher compression rates for the same audio quality. As with MP3 unlicensed encoders will be illegal, but unlike MP3 no free decoders will be tolerated... S: I find the ISO's current trend of accepting standards which cannot be implemented without violating patents worrisome. While I agree with some readers that a lot of work goes into this type of research I disagree that the key elements are inventions: they are discoveries about how human perception works. As a result, an unrestricted alternative (like gzip was to pkzip) should not only be possible, but encouraged. What do you think? I've corrected MPEG-3 to MPEG-1 Layer 3. Thanks manuka for your correction. I've also corrected the "like gzip" statement to "like gzip was to pkzip" since it seems to be causing some confusion. Finally thanks to Christian who pointed out I forgot the u in Fraunhofer. Oops.

My eagerly awaited copy of C'T has arrived, and in it there is a short interview with Martin Sieler, multimedia software lead at the Fraunhofer Institute. The topic was Fraunhofer's demand for patent license fees on free MP3 encoders. In it Sieler disputes that the encoders were free because the internet sites distributing them made money on the banner advertisements. He also discusses the newest MPEG standard (MPEG-2 Advanced Audio Coding -- also to be in MPEG-4): a refinement of the MPEG-1 layer 3 technology (MP3), it will provide even higher compression rates for the same audio quality. As with MP3 unlicensed encoders will be illegal, but unlike MP3 no free decoders will be tolerated... S: I find the ISO's current trend of accepting standards which cannot be implemented without violating patents worrisome. While I agree with some readers that a lot of work goes into this type of research I disagree that the key elements are inventions: they are discoveries about how human perception works. As a result, an unrestricted alternative (like gzip was to pkzip) should not only be possible, but encouraged. What do you think? I've corrected MPEG-3 to MPEG-1 Layer 3. Thanks manuka for your correction. I've also corrected the "like gzip" statement to "like gzip was to pkzip" since it seems to be causing some confusion. Finally thanks to Christian who pointed out I forgot the u in Fraunhofer. Oops.

My eagerly awaited copy of C'T has arrived, and in it there is a short interview with Martin Sieler, multimedia software lead at the Fraunhofer Institute. The topic was Fraunhofer's demand for patent license fees on free MP3 encoders. In it Sieler disputes that the encoders were free because the internet sites distributing them made money on the banner advertisements. He also discusses the newest MPEG standard (MPEG-2 Advanced Audio Coding -- also to be in MPEG-4): a refinement of the MPEG-1 layer 3 technology (MP3), it will provide even higher compression rates for the same audio quality. As with MP3 unlicensed encoders will be illegal, but unlike MP3 no free decoders will be tolerated... S: I find the ISO's current trend of accepting standards which cannot be implemented without violating patents worrisome. While I agree with some readers that a lot of work goes into this type of research I disagree that the key elements are inventions: they are discoveries about how human perception works. As a result, an unrestricted alternative (like gzip was to pkzip) should not only be possible, but encouraged. What do you think? I've corrected MPEG-3 to MPEG-1 Layer 3. Thanks manuka for your correction. I've also corrected the "like gzip" statement to "like gzip was to pkzip" since it seems to be causing some confusion. Finally thanks to Christian who pointed out I forgot the u in Fraunhofer. Oops.