Slashdot Mirror

Conferences that require peer-reviewed acceptance of the papers are what I consider tech conferences. As someone that has ONE published IEEE paper (NOT as the first author) and helped with another, internal-reviewed, government, paper as an intern, there is literally no comparison between something like Collision Conference, or the local promote-tech conferences I go to in New Mexico, and an actually peer reviewed conference. None. They have literally nothing in common, except that they both are nominally conferences.

The promote-tech conferences are filled with wild optimism, alcohol, and dumbassery. The peer reviewed conferences are filled with super hardcore academics, and very high end engineers, actually driving technology forward. It is easy to pay to go to these tech parties, including purchasing "speaker" spots, and much more difficult to get accepted to a high end research conference as a speaker. I believe Defcon is sort of in the middle. I applied for a full speaking spot there, was rejected, but then offered a lightning talk spot, and then was offered a lighting talk backup spot there before I could reply to the lighting spot talk. I declined. Defcon to me seems like a cross between the two, but closer to the party type of event than the academic type of event.

This! I thought they'd determined that the cause in cuba was likely some interaction of anti-eavesdropping tech that the US was using. They were doing it to themselves: https://www.spectrum.ieee.org/...

Even if you can upload the image to them to "fingerprint" images are often cropped and converted to other image formats and recompressd which fucks that up. So unless they have some super AI that can detect that from a 2nd generation repost this wont work.

Images can be fingerprinted or hashed with the help of perceptual hashing (alternative article). These hashes will match even if the original image has been cropped, resized, changed in color or rotated (to a certain extent).

See also Block Mean Value Based Image Perceptual Hashing (2006):

Image perceptual hashing has been proposed to identify or authenticate image contents in a robust way against distortions caused by compression, noise, common signal processing and geometrical modifications, while still holding a good discriminability for different ones in sense of human perception.

Not to poo-poo their work, but this is definitely not a first. A quick google search reveals several:
      https://gizmodo.com/its-almost...
      https://spectrum.ieee.org/auto...
      https://www.ted.com/talks/a_ro...

I also remember a DARPA project to create a flying insect with a camera, that was powered entirely by ambient wi-fi. It would fly a bit, then spend hours charging, then fly a bit more.

The problem is, puck-sized LIDAR systems, as seen in 8-packs on the Apple dev car, cost 8000 a piece and that is why Testa uses cheapo-cams and parking radar.

Velodyne announced solid-state LIDAR in 2006, and developed a prototype in 2017. They have claimed that in mass quantity, they will be able to get the manufacturing cost down to $50 per sensor. The smartest thing Tesla can do is simply punt on self-driving until it comes out, and then go ahead and adopt it even though they said it wouldn't be necessary. The units are supposed to enter mass production this year...

The problem is, puck-sized LIDAR systems, as seen in 8-packs on the Apple dev car, cost 8000 a piece and that is why Testa uses cheapo-cams and parking radar.

Velodyne announced solid-state LIDAR in 2006, and developed a prototype in 2017. They have claimed that in mass quantity, they will be able to get the manufacturing cost down to $50 per sensor. The smartest thing Tesla can do is simply punt on self-driving until it comes out, and then go ahead and adopt it even though they said it wouldn't be necessary. The units are supposed to enter mass production this year...

I have a zillion more channels than back in the Cro-Magnon days but lately there hasn't been much programs that make me compelling to watch them. I don't know if it's me (i.e. they say when you are old you have seen all the old movies and all the old reruns). IEEE Broadcast Techology Society had article mentioning a three-legged stool. Equipment to send TV, equipment to receive it, content that is delivered. Eliminate any one of these three, the stool collapses. I jumped over to the BTS website, some interesting mentions but my first impression all this latest technology is mostly for the people in the business for them to show off to others in the business their latest toys. People that receive content i.e. consumers, they're just there to consume. That is no real reason to produce critically acclaimed programming, entertaining, and or thought provoking programs.

from https://bts.ieee.org/news/142-...

“Consumers, quick to adopt new media and ways to tap into it, have come to expect the ability to access sight-and-sound content from any source on any device, anywhere, anytime – whether that content is broadcast over-the-air, delivered via cable, satellite, phone lines or stored at home.”

“Digital TV was a start in this direction, but the past dozen years have witnessed technology revolutions in nearly every related field and consumer expectations have risen accordingly.”

Go here, scroll down to the picture of the modern wind turbine mast standing without any blades attached and explain to me again how a wind turbine can survive a Category 4 hurricane. While you're there, look for the picture of the devastated solar panel field and tell me again how modern solar panels can survive a Category 4 hurricane.

Wanting something to be true isn't the same as it actually being true.

The island only has one electric company, and prior to Maria, it was $9 billion in debt and utilizing outdated infrastructure and equipment.

and

With a population of 3.74 million people, it works out to $2406/person, 8.7%GDP. on a per capita income of ~$20k.

That $2,406/person is only to bail out the power company financially, it doesn't provide one penny for rebuilding the infrastructure to current standards, it simply settles the debt for the craptacular power grid the hurricane wiped out. To "Build Back Better" is estimated to cost an additional $17.6 Billion, which adds another $5K or so per capita...

I'd settle for just B&W standard def tube type TV set for excellent content delivered by broadcasters...

Getting back to types of TVs, a recent issue of IEEE Broadcast Technology Society, https://bts.ieee.org/ mentioned the three-legged stool of equipment needed for delivering television programs, equipment needed to receive television programs, and ***the content*** of these television programs [remove any one of these legs, the stool falls down]. It has been written as technology improves (it really has, the pictures of flatscreens soooooo much better than those old CRTs) but content broadcasted? Lots of discussion about quality of that so if you don't have the latest tech TV you're probably not missing much.

Atia, M, Hilal, A.R. (Allaa R.), Stellings, C. (Clive), Hartwell, E. (Eric), Toonstra, J. (Jason), Miners, W.B. (William B.), & Basir, O.A. (Otman A.). (2017). A Low-Cost Lane-Determination System Using GNSS/IMU Fusion and HMM-Based Multistage Map Matching. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems. doi:10.1109/TITS.2017.2672541

High intelligence can also be considered an over-adaptation. Dual engineers are more likely go childless, or to generate autistic children.

To expand a bit on the motor: it should be clarified that it's not a normal switched reluctance motor (SRM), but rather a PMSRM (permanent magnet switched reluctance motor).

Reluctance is used to some extent in many hybrid EV motors, in the form of "IPM" - interior permanent magnet motors. These are a hybrid of a conventional surface permanent magnet motor (SPM) and a SRM, allowing for high power at high speeds that SPMs don't allow for, as well as reducing magnet sizes (and thus rare earth consumption). By contrast, a PMSRM is a SPM that incorporates permanent magnets into the stator; they don't move and are readily cooled, while sculpting and enhancing the field to increase torque density and help control torque ripple.

It's a new type of motor, combining extreme efficiency, high torque density, and reliability over that offered by an IPM. Getting a PMSRM to work smoothly is an impressive job.

It is not: https://www.researchgate.net/p...

Seriously. And "small on a chip"? What is that nonsense? Ever heard of chips being put into cases and being fitted with leads?
With minimal effort, I found a source that says around 200uA current through a memresistor. That is well within range what you can handle entirely manually on macroscopic scale: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/doc...

I think this "memresistor" thing is just another instance of people with no clue seeing the philosopher's stone finally being found.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/ener...

Oil is refined into gasoline to run cars. If only someone would invent an "electric car" that ran on electricity instead, we could power them with wind energy.

Hey, you know what else oil is used for?

Building and lubricating wind turbines

A CAN bus is a serial bus used in cars.
You could have googled that.

If you need 'security' you have to harden the devices connected to it, not the bus.

Well both if you think 'defense in depth' is a useful concept in secure design.

In cars, CAN bus has been the conduit through which a hacker cracking the bluetooth audio is able to mess with the brakes. Ask Jeep. https://www.wired.com/2015/07/...

I've designed CAN bus systems in the past. There is no security aspect to the protocol. No authentication, no integrity, no encryption, no ACLs. People have been proposing them at conferences.. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/doc... . But with ISO in the mix, there is unlikely to be a quick path to fixing this.

It's kinda the issue inherent in capitalism.
  Capitalism Corollary: Market competition by profit motive provides the best product for the best price to the market consumer.

That's free market, but capitalism can nicely exist without free markets, in fact, without a free market profit can be pushed up even more (for a few).

1. The goal of capitalist endeavors is to bring in the maximum profit.
  2. High profit is attained providing the best product and maximizing market share.

Sometimes, but more often it is done by anti-competitive behaviour (remember DR-DOS) or bribing politicians to pass certain laws.

3. MAXIMUM profit is attained via 100% share.
4. 100% market control is anti-competitive thus reducing the value of the competitive market to the consumer.
The solution (thus far accepted) is to accept that people will seek out 100% market share and to break them up and say, "OK! Let's run the race again under these new controls!"

Unless, of course they are too big to fail.

And even without having an "official" monopoly, the consumer can be screwed nicely, sorry I mean: profits can be maximized without providing the best product

He hid a private key. A string of text. That's it. The story has nothing to do with cryptocurrency.

These guys stored a video clip in DNA.

So now the consumer can chose from solar panels made in the US (or Europe) with proper environmental controls, or no name solar panels made in China that dump a shit ton of real, nasty pollution into the water stream (and eventually the ocean) for essentially the same price.
https://spectrum.ieee.org/gree...

The only idiots who are bitching about this are the same fools who said nothing about Obama's tarrifs, and this is nothing more than a brainless Trump=bad, Obama=good stupidity, rather than looking objectively at the actual issue.

This is just the beginning. It is in our best interest to onshore and automate our manufacturing needs. We have turned China from a third world nation into the fastest growing economy with all the trade we gave them, and they turn around and cheat us with currency manipulation and are a bad actor looking to rule the world. They have stolen and copied virtually every piece of IP that was ever sent to China for manufacture, lets see how they do when we pull most of that back to the US and automate it and pocket the money in the US, leaving them with no IP to steal and nowhere to sell their cheap products.

I don't think you understand the difference.

How does superposition help?

The difference between regular computers and quantum computers boils down to how they approach a problem.

A regular computer tries to solve a problem the same way you might try to escape a maze – by trying every possible corridor, turning back at dead ends, until you eventually find the way out. But superposition allows the quantum computer to try all the paths at once – in essence, finding the shortcut.

Two bits in your computer can be in four possible states (00, 01, 10, or 11), but only one of them at any time. This limits the computer to processing one input at a time (like trying one corridor in the maze).

In a quantum computer, two qubits can also represent the exact same four states (00, 01, 10, or 11). The difference is, because of superposition, the qubits can represent all four at the same time. That’s a bit like having four regular computers running side-by-side.

If you add more bits to a regular computer, it can still only deal with one state at a time. But as you add qubits, the power of your quantum computer grows exponentially. For the mathematically inclined, we can say that if you have “n” qubits, you can simultaneously represent 2n states.)

Qudits: The Real Future of Quantum Computing?

The superpositions that qubits can adopt let them each help perform two calculations at once. If two qubits are quantum-mechanically linked, or entangled, they can help perform four calculations simultaneously; three qubits, eight calculations; and so on. As a result, a quantum computer with 300 qubits could perform more calculations in an instant than there are atoms in the known universe, solving certain problems much faster than classical computers. However, superpositions are extraordinarily fragile, making it difficult to work with multiple qubits.

I'm pretty sure your PC isn't going to be able to do that.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/ener...

Senator Cruz says the Internet did just fine until the previous Net Neutrality rules were adopted. I don't think that's entirely true. It seems to me that the technology to undermine Net Neutrality, something similar to deep packet inspection, was only discovered in 2009 by one of the "fathers of the Internet":

https://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/networks/a-radical-new-router

"In 1999, I founded Caspian Networks to develop large terabit flow routers, which I planned to sell to the carriers that maintain the Internet’s core infrastructure. That market, however, proved hard to crack—the carriers seem satisfied with overprovisioning, as well as techniques like traffic caching and compression, which ameliorate congestion without addressing the roots of the problem.

Flow management can solve this capacity crunch. The concept of data flow might be more easily understood in the case of a voice or video stream, but it applies to all traffic over the Internet"

Network types: Is this accurate?

Most electricity is generated from fossil fuels, so it would be hit by the same tax.

Why? Powerstations, even coal fired ones, don't dump huge amounts of very nasty particulates into the air at ground level right in the middle of densely populated cities.

Do note that EVs are not more efficient than ICE vehicles. Take the ~40% efficiency of an electricity-generating coal plant, multiply it by 90% transmission losses, by the 75% battery charging efficiency, and approx 85% electric motor efficiency, and you get (0.4)*(0.9)*(0.75)*(0.85) = 0.2295. Or 23% energy efficiency for EVs.

So basically, you get much better pollution control without any loss in efficiency? Sounds like a huge win to me.

Except...

That's if you have an old coal plant. If you have a combined cycle plant you'll hit 62% thermal efficiency on the front end, never mind if you use nuclear or renewables.

Your figures for charging are pessimistic. Charging is more like 80-90% efficient.

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/doc...

Distribution losses are more like 6.5% in the US not 10% that you quoted. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

And even some random low power cheapo electric motor easily beats 85% efficiency:

https://www.acdcdrives.co.uk/t...

And larger motors are almost always more efficient.

And even if we take your incredibly pessimistic numbers, you still have the advantage of electric braking. But more realistically, the efficiency is more like 42% plant to wheel (47% taking the more optimistic end of the range).

So penalizing technologies solely based on pollution emissions is equivalent to penalizing higher energy efficiency. Higher efficiency and higher pollution come as a package deal with combustion processes.

Which is a phenomenally good argument for electric cars. If you want the efficiency, you want to put the relatively dirty place a long way from people and all in one place so you can have effective scrubbers on the output.

Humans, as a whole, are terrible on snow. Their knowledge isn't collectively cumulative. Every year you have to train a new fleet of drivers at 16. What is the rate of

On the other hand autonomous mini rally cars have taught themselves to power slide. With a software update every vehicle going forward could all know how to do that.

Generally, this is a very computationally intensive approach, but AutoRally can calculate an optimized trajectory from the weighted average of 2,560 different trajectory possibilities, all simulated in parallel on to the monster onboard GPU. Each of these trajectories represents the oncoming 2.5 seconds of vehicle motion, and AutoRally recomputes this entire optimization process 60 times every second.

That's better than any human can currently do and will only continue to get better.

The value of a currency is determined by what people are willing to pay for it (again, just like anything).

Art being sold for 10s of millions of dollars.
Non-voting, non-dividend-paying stocks.

There are plenty of examples of items being purchased, physical or virtual, with the primary goal of trusting a greater fool to pay yet more for it (there are tax advantages to certain losses and gains however).

Spectrum magazine has a current series on blockchain technology.

NIST recently published its four-volume SP800-63b Digital Identity Guidelines . Among other things, it makes three important suggestions when it comes to passwords:

1. Stop it with the annoying password complexity rules. They make passwords harder to remember. They increase errors because artificially complex passwords are harder to type in. And they don't help that much. It's better to allow people to use pass phrases.
2. Stop it with password expiration. That was an old idea for an old way we used computers. Today, don't make people change their passwords unless there's indication of compromise.
3. Let people use password managers. This is how we deal with all the passwords we need.

These password rules were failed attempts to fix the user. Better we fix the security systems.

Ahem, I think you forgot just how ugly and limited everything was on 8 bit computers (you're drivelling a bit when you say microcontroller).

Oh no I'm not.

Yes you are: "they decided to start with something simpler: a single-chip microcontroller. But the engineers soon realized that the microcontroller market was crowded with very good chips. Even if theirs was better than the others, they’d see only slim profits. Zilog had to aim higher on the food chain, and the Z80 microprocessor project was born". By the time it becomes a CPU a home computer, it's not called a mcrocontroller, it's called a microprocessor. By convention. Go ahead, define your own terminology, but don't be surprised if people look at you like you're wearing nose glasses on a dinner date.

How about IEEE?

I could make a fairly strong case for today's multi-core processors being fundamentally different in design and execution than the mini's and mainframes of the 60's.

Please do so. I don't think that case is going to be as strong as you think it is. After all, many of fundamental ideas behind today's multi-core CPUs are from the 60s: Out Of Execution (1967) Multi-cores and SIMD (1966)

Similarly, today's massively parallel designs in GPUs are also fundamental advances.

There is clearly a difference in scale in speed, but is there a fundamental advantage? Many of the key concepts behind GPUs were already known in the 1960s: SIMD (see above), the CDC6000 series used switching between threads like GPU do to compensate latency, vector processors also developed in 1960s also invented some of the concepts used by todays GPUs.

> Granted, you're unlikely to see a one-transistor change

And that's about all they need to screw you over. This was here a year or two ago, all it takes is 20 transistors and one capacitor, and knowledge of where on the die you've placed your (privilege) flag register, and you're screwed.

http://spectrum.ieee.org/trans...

100 million lines quoted here. And they still can't make the Bluetooth work.

This was discussed before. It's most likely highly directional RF (microwaves), which easily penetrate walls, etc, while staying well focused. There are numerous studies where microwaves directed at a person's head will manifest as sounds they can "hear", although it is likely caused by the direct stimulation of the structures in the ear by the radio waves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
http://grouper.ieee.org/groups...

I also suspect it is a microwave / RF based weapon. It would be extremely difficult to focus sonic energy and have it pass through walls in a building. Sound waves are, after all, vibrations through a physical medium, and every time you transition from one physical medium to another (air to wall, through the things in the wall, back to air, etc), the sound would be diffracted and reflected all over the place.

Because the energy was very highly focused, that pretty much rules out an acoustic device unless the device was right in the room or perhaps embedded in the wall of the room. Due to the number of people affected in various locations, I don't think it is realistic that there would have been so many of these devices in so many places. Plus they would be discovered once an investigation began if they were in the buildings.

There are many studies showing that RF energy with enough power, directed through the brain, will manifest as sound. The energy will also cause various kinds of damage to the structures in the head and brain.

So that really only leaves RF energy as a source that can be focused to that extent ("It was as if he'd walked through some invisible wall cutting straight through his room."), which can pass through walls with little or no refraction / reflection, be operated from some distance away (even outside the building), manifests as sound when the head is directly in the path of the energy, and can cause injuries more than just hearing loss.

It sounds like the attacks were done while people were asleep in bed. If the attacker knew the general layout of the rooms (where the bed was relative to the window) then they could easily direct the weapon to the head area of the bed and leave it for a few minutes, perhaps very slowly sweeping it across that general area. If a light was turned on, then they would probably move to the next target room because they knew they had achieved the desired result.

Here's a study going into the specifics of RF energy being perceived as sound:
http://grouper.ieee.org/groups...

Look faggot, not all patent lawsuits are trolling. If prior art hasn't been demonstrated (it hasn't) and the patent covers something novel (it does), it's totally reasonable to sue and collect royalties. Get over yourself.

I definitely agree that not all patent lawsuits are trolling but taking patent litigation to a Teas court usually raise suspicions. As for "prior art" see here (1990) . As for novel well, I think a few Google searches will blow that claim out of the water.

Posting an AC because you don't deserve my real login name especially since you resort to name calling.

Before you slam me on this, here me out. You see people going to college, getting a traditional "four year degree", some going even for post graduate degrees. In what? Teaching, philosophy, ancient languages and what not. Not a lot of "demand" so to speak for those degrees.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/at-w...

2013 statistics:
Every year we graduate about 252,000 people with a STEM bachelor's degree. There are about 180,000 STEM job openings per year. If you assume every single one of those openings is entry-level, that leaves 70,000 more graduates than openings. And assuming those are all entry-level is a terrible assumption.

2017's economy is not 2013's economy, but they are not radically different.

It's not people who majored in underwater basket weaving.

Most kids, would be better served if they went to a two year technical college/school, getting an associate degree in science, computers and the like

See previous statistics.

Plus, even though it was the 70's, I came out of school DEBT FREE.

So you were debt free back when school was cheap and/or free depending on where you live. Congratulations?

There's a book on my reading list that I haven't read yet (pay attention, trolls), about the history of shipping containers: "Ninety Percent of Everything: Inside Shipping, the Invisible Industry That Puts Clothes on Your Back, Gas in Your Car, and Food on Your Plate" by Rose George. The New York Times gave it a good review when it first came out, mentioning that the author traveled on a Maersk ship to research the book.

In related news, autonomous ships will soon become a reality. More targets for hackers.

  http://spectrum.ieee.org/transportation/marine/forget-autonomous-cars-autonomous-ships-are-almost-here

They are basically autonoumous right now. A half-a-mile long ship carrying a billion dollar worth of goods is typicall manned by three people, the captain, the engineer and the cook. An autonomous sailing ship could get rid of those people.

An autonomous sailing ship could get rid of ONE those people

There's a book on my reading list that I haven't read yet (pay attention, trolls), about the history of shipping containers: "Ninety Percent of Everything: Inside Shipping, the Invisible Industry That Puts Clothes on Your Back, Gas in Your Car, and Food on Your Plate" by Rose George. The New York Times gave it a good review when it first came out, mentioning that the author traveled on a Maersk ship to research the book.

In related news, autonomous ships will soon become a reality. More targets for hackers.
  http://spectrum.ieee.org/transportation/marine/forget-autonomous-cars-autonomous-ships-are-almost-here

They are basically autonoumous right now. A half-a-mile long ship carrying a billion dollar worth of goods is typicall manned by three people, the captain, the engineer and the cook. An autonomous sailing ship could get rid of those people.

There's a book on my reading list that I haven't read yet (pay attention, trolls), about the history of shipping containers: "Ninety Percent of Everything: Inside Shipping, the Invisible Industry That Puts Clothes on Your Back, Gas in Your Car, and Food on Your Plate" by Rose George. The New York Times gave it a good review when it first came out, mentioning that the author traveled on a Maersk ship to research the book.

In related news, autonomous ships will soon become a reality. More targets for hackers.
http://spectrum.ieee.org/transportation/marine/forget-autonomous-cars-autonomous-ships-are-almost-here

I'm astonished to hear that absolutely no COTS digital electronics have ever experienced crash or corruption inducing single event effects (When did they change the acronym from SEE to SEI?). I'd be willing to bet that there have been SEE/SEI crashes, but generations of craptacular Microsoft operating systems have concealed them. It's quite clear from the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer on board that the station is getting pelted with high energy protons day in and day out, not to mention the heavier stuff that contributes significantly to the radiation exposure astronauts have to keep track of. One of those particles hitting the right transistor will most certainly change the value stored in a DRAM cell, and now that we're talking about billions of cells with a transistor each, that's a lot of targets.

It's actually a matter of area. As in the area of the silicon that is vulnerable.

Right down here on earth, use of ECC DRAM is a must on a cluster, because most clusters are stuffed full of RAM That a SEU (single event upset - the current terminology) has a really good chance of upsetting a bit in the memory of a node in the cluster.

Someone tried to build a cluster of PowerMac G5 computers. The cluster could not be booted completely before an SEU caused a crash.

http://spectrum.ieee.org/compu...

In a single system like a laptop, the area is low enough that you might not see it (especially if it hits memory that isn't actively being used). In a cluster, that changes things and on bit might affect the whole cluster.

Well what do you know?
I still haven't run out of copy/paste NOR has the reality abruptly changed to fit delusions of pathetic creatures who can't face facts.
How's them mod points working for ya, snowflake? Still downmodding facts and arguments you can't accept?
Aaaaw...

Anyways... as I was saying above to that CUNT who's accusing people promoting renewables of genocide...

Those hundreds of thousands you mention have NO energy, if by energy you mean electricity.
Nor the means to get it. There is no electric grid in most those places. Nor will there be as long as there's money in stealing copper cables.

And guess what?
Those "douche bag westerns preaching about global warming" are actually a part of the solution.
Cause all that preaching is the reason why western governments have pumped in billions of dollars into renewable energy (and continue to do so), increasing production and lowering prices of solar and wind power (particularly solar) - thus creating conditions for all those hundreds of thousands you clearly care sooooo much for to get electricity for the first time.
Electricity from renewable sources, that is.
Which is not only cleaner now, thanks in part to those "western douche bags", it is also cheaper than the same electricity from coal.

Which kinda makes you a part of the problem, doesn't it?
So... how does it feel to be "actively killing real people right now"? Does it get your limp dick hard enough to see it?
Without a microscope?

Poor snowflake can't face reality.
Snowflake want rubber ball? Squeezed between its ties it might feel like a testicle? Maybe?
Maybe then snowflake can face reality instead of being a pathetic loser who can't accept factuality of arguments, forced to throw mod-tantrums instead?
Like a retarded baby with diarrhea. Only more retarded.

Anyways... as I was saying above to that CUNT who's accusing people promoting renewables of genocide...

Those hundreds of thousands you mention have NO energy, if by energy you mean electricity.
Nor the means to get it. There is no electric grid in most those places. Nor will there be as long as there's money in stealing copper cables.

And guess what?
Those "douche bag westerns preaching about global warming" are actually a part of the solution.
Cause all that preaching is the reason why western governments have pumped in billions of dollars into renewable energy (and continue to do so), increasing production and lowering prices of solar and wind power (particularly solar) - thus creating conditions for all those hundreds of thousands you clearly care sooooo much for to get electricity for the first time.
Electricity from renewable sources, that is.
Which is not only cleaner now, thanks in part to those "western douche bags", it is also cheaper than the same electricity from coal.

Which kinda makes you a part of the problem, doesn't it?
So... how does it feel to be "actively killing real people right now"? Does it get your limp dick hard enough to see it?
Without a microscope?

The best part of all this is - facts still remain facts.
I.e. My downmodders are proving themselves to be SUCH pathetic cognitively dissonant losers with each downmode it's so HI-LAR-I-OUS it's almost tragic.
Like watching a brat writhing on the floor, kicking and screaming "IT'S NOT! IT'S NOT! IT'S NOT!".
And then you say "Oh yes it is." And kick it in the face.

You snowflakes realize you're more likely to run out of mod points while trying to bury facts than I am to run out of copy/paste?

Aaaaw... someone don't likey facty-facty? Boo-hoo... Poor snowflake. Don't you know that global warming is bad for you?
Too bad copy/paste is my ally.

Anyways... as I was saying above to that CUNT who's accusing people promoting renewables of genocide...

Those hundreds of thousands you mention have NO energy, if by energy you mean electricity.
Nor the means to get it. There is no electric grid in most those places. Nor will there be as long as there's money in stealing copper cables.

And guess what?
Those "douche bag westerns preaching about global warming" are actually a part of the solution.
Cause all that preaching is the reason why western governments have pumped in billions of dollars into renewable energy (and continue to do so), increasing production and lowering prices of solar and wind power (particularly solar) - thus creating conditions for all those hundreds of thousands you clearly care sooooo much for to get electricity for the first time.
Electricity from renewable sources, that is.
Which is not only cleaner now, thanks in part to those "western douche bags", it is also cheaper than the same electricity from coal.

Which kinda makes you a part of the problem, doesn't it?
So... how does it feel to be "actively killing real people right now"? Does it get your limp dick hard enough to see it?
Without a microscope?

Aaaaw... someone don't likey facty-facty? Boo-hoo... Poor snowflake. Don't you know that global warming is bad for you?
Too bad copy/paste is my ally.

Anyways... as I was saying above to that CUNT who's accusing people promoting renewables of genocide...

Those hundreds of thousands you mention have NO energy, if by energy you mean electricity.
Nor the means to get it. There is no electric grid in most those places. Nor will there be as long as there's money in stealing copper cables.

And guess what?
Those "douche bag westerns preaching about global warming" are actually a part of the solution.
Cause all that preaching is the reason why western governments have pumped in billions of dollars into renewable energy (and continue to do so), increasing production and lowering prices of solar and wind power (particularly solar) - thus creating conditions for all those hundreds of thousands you clearly care sooooo much for to get electricity for the first time.
Electricity from renewable sources, that is.
Which is not only cleaner now, thanks in part to those "western douche bags", it is also cheaper than the same electricity from coal.

Which kinda makes you a part of the problem, doesn't it?
So... how does it feel to be "actively killing real people right now"? Does it get your limp dick hard enough to see it?
Without a microscope?

Those hundreds of thousands you mention have NO energy, if by energy you mean electricity.
Nor the means to get it. There is no electric grid in most those places. Nor will there be as long as there's money in stealing copper cables.

And guess what?
Those "douche bag westerns preaching about global warming" are actually a part of the solution.
Cause all that preaching is the reason why western governments have pumped in billions of dollars into renewable energy (and continue to do so), increasing production and lowering prices of solar and wind power (particularly solar) - thus creating conditions for all those hundreds of thousands you clearly care sooooo much for to get electricity for the first time.
Electricity from renewable sources, that is.
Which is not only cleaner now, thanks in part to those "western douche bags", it is also cheaper than the same electricity from coal.

Which kinda makes you a part of the problem, doesn't it?
So... how does it feel to be "actively killing real people right now"? Does it get your limp dick hard enough to see it?
Without a microscope?

I think Elon Musk is the one that has either a limited understanding of current AI technology or just hypes AI on purpose, while being fully aware that AI still has major limitations and they are unlikely to disappear within the next few years. Important and very important progress has been made, but General AI is likely still very far away.
Facebook's director of AI Yann LeCun gave a very good interview to IEEE spectrum: Facebook AI Director Yann LeCun on His Quest to Unleash Deep Learning and Make Machines Smarter

http://spectrum.ieee.org/ns/IE...

What I wonder is, say you have a 5V ADC. Using their technique, could you drive a 15V (max) signal into the ADC and effectively triple your resolution? You're still using all your bits to measure a 5V range... so if that's the case then it truly is quite groundbreaking.

It may be groundbreaking, but not for the reason advertised in the paper/article/summary. From a quick look at this paper, ADC power dissipation is proportional to f * 2^(2*n), where f is the sampling rate and n is the number of bits per sample. High performance ADCs are constrained by power dissipation, which limits either sampling rate or resolution. What these guys are probably trying to do is constrain n. By allowing signals larger than the ADC input range, and then unwrapping them in software, they increase the effective number of bits. Even if they gain only 2 bits by doing this, this is a factor of 16 advantage in power dissipation (but how does the self-resetting ADC compare to normal ADCs in terms of power?). In any case, the article seems to be hyping a non-existent advantage (sampling signals exceeding the nominal ADC range - why not just attenuate the signal and use a higher resolution ADC?), but does not mention the real advantage (power dissipation).

There have been plenty of real advances in the last few years, not just speed improvements. For me, the most impressive thing was Generative Adversarial Networks in 2014, but there have been plenty of advances. The most recent article I read was on Relational Reasoning https://www.technologyreview.c... .

Here as some more recent advances
Turing Learning - https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/ne...
Evolution Strategies - https://www.technologyreview.c...
Bayesian Program Synthesis - https://techxplore.com/news/20...
Gaussian Processes - https://www.wired.com/2017/02/...
AI Passes Standard Intelligence Test - https://phys.org/news/2017-01-...
Semi-Supervised Learning For Handwriting Recognition - https://phys.org/news/2016-12-...
Lipreading - https://www.technologyreview.c...
One-Shot Learning - https://www.technologyreview.c...
Differentiable Neural Computer - http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-...
Bayesian Program Learning - http://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech...

I remember an article a couple of years back on this subject, and it explained that exascale computing is not feasible unless the energy cost of moving a single bit around goes down from the picojoules range into the femtojoules.

The closest reference I can find now is:

http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-...

The relevant part is:

"Data needs to move on interconnects and they found that even using some really cool emerging technology it still cost 1-3 picojoules for a bit to go through just one interconnect level"