the projection though no doubt well-sourced is no more accurate than the models that it is based off
Naturally, though those same sources have been through rigorous peer review, and have been widely accepted by most fellow experts in the field. Again I'm not seeing you cite any evidence like peer-reviewed studies finding those models to be "deeply broken" - only the usual unsourced claims cribbed from the standard rabble of denialist blogs. Plenty of studies supporting them, though. And of course real life.
you don't understand my position
Unsurprisingly, since it's a position you've adopted with no actual evidence. Despite your use of the present tense, you've not shown any examples of said industry "milking the public teat" over climate change (though I can provide many examples of e.g. fossil fuel industries milking away).
Over lab distances of centimetres, with no interference or contention for spectrum. Things are a little different in the real world.
The only way anyone has managed to get 1Gbps rates outside the lab is by devoting huge chunks of spectrum to the link, and/or using line-of-sight frequencies that can barely penetrate paper (same as inside the lab). But these limitations make gigabit wireless unsuitable even for a few dozen mobile users in a typical cluttered cell footprint, let alone a couple hundred Netflix-streaming houses as well. And while beam-forming can help to reduce spectrum contention, it doesn't scale well - antennas get a lot more expensive and computation-heavy as you add simultaneous users, and it's much harder for mobile devices to do similar beam-forming for uploads. Your hope that prices will drop by an order of magnitude sounds like pure wishful thinking to me, even if 5G is rolled out by 2022. It's not so simple to hand-wave away the fundamental restrictions of wireless.
By contrast, fibre landlines are capable of terabits per second (theoretically a lot more) - to each and every user. Zero contention, zero interference, with a host of other advantages. And once the fibre is laid, we can keep boosting speeds for decades by just upgrading the modems at each end.
You have lamps in every room, don't you? It's not required to use a single source. And as others have said, dedicated IR LEDs probably make more sense than using the visible lightbulbs - they could operate day or night without interfering with our eyeballs.
Bandwidth demands have been increasing by ~50% annually for the last 30 years. If that continues we've got around 15 years before 200 Gbps starts to look a little pokey. Probably time to start thinking about these sort of solutions, because our current low-frequency radio waves ain't gonna cut it.
I just find it amusing how it seems corporations will naturally move towards efficient & effective service to stay competitive, except when they're lying, money-hungry bastards that are only in it for themselves, and the sole criteria for which it will be today is whether their conclusions agree with your own.
The problem with your cute analogy is that there is no cleaning lady. She's on holiday this month. We looked everywhere - no cat, no earthquakes, no car driven through the front wall, no other causes we can identify anywhere that could have remotely the same effect. Just the golf ball.
So now we have people telling us the cleaning lady must have decided to unexpectedly come in & break the vase instead of going on vacation, even though there's no other signs anywhere that she was here, despite a thorough search. It couldn't possibly have been the golf ball. We love golfing! Golf balls are awesome, and would never break windows.
That list has a duplicated item. This is clear proof that the whole list has been fabricated by a conspiracy of neocons to drive their global agenda! I demand to see the emails of the authors!
I've been here a while now, and yet I'm still amazed at how many people don't even get past the headline before they have to post (or moderate) a rant almost entirely unrelated to the actual news.
Am I newer here than I thought, is everyone just yelling from their lawns, or has the level of buried rage around here really increased so much?
1) & 2) Yeah, the linked papers were older, but there's (still) no record of the new paper, so I went with what I could find.
3) You're right, my pitch math was way off. But the glass discs shown weren't much more than a square inch, and reportedly could hold "up to" 360TB, so the result is probably still close. There's no reason given to limit the discs to only 3 layers - they could have hundreds, at 5 micron spacing. It's also possible they could be using a tighter dot pitch since 2006.
other 3) I read that phrase to mean "the three layers are separated by 5 micrometres", which is confirmed in Fig 2 a).
4) Each laser pulse writes a dot storing 3 bits, so the I/O time would be a much more reasonable 150 years:-) Even less if you're right about 3).
Luckily you can etch human-readable labels into the discs as well, as per TFA. Which could include micro-scale text describing how to read the really small stuff.
According to the paper, they wrote three layers deep at a 150nm pitch. At 3 bits per nanodot, the claimed 360TB could be stored in about one square inch. Compare that to the latest 10TB HDDs, which have an areal density of around 0.14 TB per square inch.
No figures are given for transfer speeds, though they describe 200kHz laser pulses, which would be about 75 kB/second - not so dramatic, but it is after all a lab prototype. There are numerous options for speeding this up in commercial products.
If the intention is to provide data for future civilisations, then presumably some "key" discs would be included, with information at various scales describing the technology, equipment, and encoding needed to read the next deeper scale. The larger scales could be inscribed in common human-readable languages, but any civilisation capable of imaging the deepest nanoscopic scales would have no problem decoding well-described binary formats as well.
While true, what you say is not particularly relevant to us today. We've been in the current phase for tens of millions of years, and are unlikely to exit this anytime soon - unless perhaps by our own doing.
The planetary biosphere may well eventually flourish, in a much warmer climate. But in the short term (hundreds of years, rather than millions), sudden and drastic changes to temperature such as those we are going through now do not give the biosphere sufficient time to adapt, and mass extinctions are likely to result. Further, we humans must also adapt, which will incur significant costs as we migrate our populations & cities, infrastructure and farmlands, to more favourable locations - and likewise, these costs rise fast if we're forced to adapt quickly. Many economic studies have been done on the financial consequences of climate mitigation vs adaption, and most find mitigation to be considerably cheaper.
If we wanted to encourage a warmer planet, this is far from the optimal way to go about it.
And everyone warmist knew that the so-called "pause" was due to a series of mild La Niñas following the extra-strong El Niño in 1998, but that didn't stop the denialists crowing over it.
Every record-breaking hottest year/month/whatever will be during a strong El Niño; that's obvious, as that's the hottest point in the ENSO cycle. What's important is that this El Niño-boosted January was hotter than every other El Niño-boosted January we've ever seen. Again.
We've had so many hottest-ever records recently that people are apparently getting blasé about them. Reminder: in the absence of a rising trend, record-breaking temperatures become steadily less common - each new record would require an ever-more unlikely confluence of factors to boost temperatures still higher than the last record.
A constant stream of highest-yet record temperatures is more than just weather; it's a rising trend.
Knives have been banned in Australian public places since the 90s, unless you have a "reasonable excuse" to be carrying one, like a picnic, need it for your job, or you're taking it somewhere or whatever. It hasn't proved to be an issue.
Lasers aren't entirely banned here, but you do need a licence for anything over 1mW. I've had some cheap eBay imports confiscated when they tested as stronger than their 1mW description.
If not, then it's a different device than described in the patent, since Claim 1 specifies separate display & computing modules, with the display itself being connected by a hinge. Think "stackable Surface".
It's a patent; only the patent claims matter. Even if TFS has a clickbait headline.
Better avoid every connected device with a mic then, including both mobile and landline phones. Or maybe limit your paranoia to the available evidence.
According to this page, some models do indeed listen for the phrase "Hi TV" after you enable the feature in the settings. When this is detected, a mic icon appears on the screen, and the TV will listen for and send voice data to the recognition servers while that mic icon is present. This isn't "constantly recording and sending", though.
I agree, but this is a potential issue for any device with a mic (even those with FOSS code, unless you're extra careful), and it's been a potential issue for many decades now (with the advent of landline phones at least), so these kind of trust questions are nothing new. I only mean it didn't suddenly become an issue when someone with a Samsung TV noticed their privacy policy.
In addition, Samsung may collect and your device may capture voice commands and associated texts so that we can provide you with Voice Recognition features and evaluate and improve the features. Samsung will collect your interactive voice commands only when you make a specific search request to the Smart TV by clicking the activation button either on the remote control or on your screen and speaking into the microphone on the remote control.
Emphasis mine. Check the source, people, not the clickbait blogs.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you're confusing me with the AC. Not the same person.
the projection though no doubt well-sourced is no more accurate than the models that it is based off
Naturally, though those same sources have been through rigorous peer review, and have been widely accepted by most fellow experts in the field. Again I'm not seeing you cite any evidence like peer-reviewed studies finding those models to be "deeply broken" - only the usual unsourced claims cribbed from the standard rabble of denialist blogs. Plenty of studies supporting them, though. And of course real life.
you don't understand my position
Unsurprisingly, since it's a position you've adopted with no actual evidence. Despite your use of the present tense, you've not shown any examples of said industry "milking the public teat" over climate change (though I can provide many examples of e.g. fossil fuel industries milking away).
5G is already being tested at 100gbps
Over lab distances of centimetres, with no interference or contention for spectrum. Things are a little different in the real world.
The only way anyone has managed to get 1Gbps rates outside the lab is by devoting huge chunks of spectrum to the link, and/or using line-of-sight frequencies that can barely penetrate paper (same as inside the lab). But these limitations make gigabit wireless unsuitable even for a few dozen mobile users in a typical cluttered cell footprint, let alone a couple hundred Netflix-streaming houses as well. And while beam-forming can help to reduce spectrum contention, it doesn't scale well - antennas get a lot more expensive and computation-heavy as you add simultaneous users, and it's much harder for mobile devices to do similar beam-forming for uploads. Your hope that prices will drop by an order of magnitude sounds like pure wishful thinking to me, even if 5G is rolled out by 2022. It's not so simple to hand-wave away the fundamental restrictions of wireless.
By contrast, fibre landlines are capable of terabits per second (theoretically a lot more) - to each and every user. Zero contention, zero interference, with a host of other advantages. And once the fibre is laid, we can keep boosting speeds for decades by just upgrading the modems at each end.
You have lamps in every room, don't you? It's not required to use a single source. And as others have said, dedicated IR LEDs probably make more sense than using the visible lightbulbs - they could operate day or night without interfering with our eyeballs.
Bandwidth demands have been increasing by ~50% annually for the last 30 years. If that continues we've got around 15 years before 200 Gbps starts to look a little pokey. Probably time to start thinking about these sort of solutions, because our current low-frequency radio waves ain't gonna cut it.
Do you? At least actuaries are accountable for their claims, and have well-sourced science and statistics to back them up.
I just find it amusing how it seems corporations will naturally move towards efficient & effective service to stay competitive, except when they're lying, money-hungry bastards that are only in it for themselves, and the sole criteria for which it will be today is whether their conclusions agree with your own.
[citation needed]
The problem with your cute analogy is that there is no cleaning lady. She's on holiday this month. We looked everywhere - no cat, no earthquakes, no car driven through the front wall, no other causes we can identify anywhere that could have remotely the same effect. Just the golf ball.
So now we have people telling us the cleaning lady must have decided to unexpectedly come in & break the vase instead of going on vacation, even though there's no other signs anywhere that she was here, despite a thorough search. It couldn't possibly have been the golf ball. We love golfing! Golf balls are awesome, and would never break windows.
More supported, or less, than your own?
That list has a duplicated item. This is clear proof that the whole list has been fabricated by a conspiracy of neocons to drive their global agenda! I demand to see the emails of the authors!
I've been here a while now, and yet I'm still amazed at how many people don't even get past the headline before they have to post (or moderate) a rant almost entirely unrelated to the actual news.
Am I newer here than I thought, is everyone just yelling from their lawns, or has the level of buried rage around here really increased so much?
Heat them to 1400 degrees C with a good blowtorch, that'll destroy the nanostructures in no time.
1) & 2) Yeah, the linked papers were older, but there's (still) no record of the new paper, so I went with what I could find.
3) You're right, my pitch math was way off. But the glass discs shown weren't much more than a square inch, and reportedly could hold "up to" 360TB, so the result is probably still close. There's no reason given to limit the discs to only 3 layers - they could have hundreds, at 5 micron spacing. It's also possible they could be using a tighter dot pitch since 2006.
other 3) I read that phrase to mean "the three layers are separated by 5 micrometres", which is confirmed in Fig 2 a).
4) Each laser pulse writes a dot storing 3 bits, so the I/O time would be a much more reasonable 150 years :-) Even less if you're right about 3).
Luckily you can etch human-readable labels into the discs as well, as per TFA. Which could include micro-scale text describing how to read the really small stuff.
According to the paper, they wrote three layers deep at a 150nm pitch. At 3 bits per nanodot, the claimed 360TB could be stored in about one square inch. Compare that to the latest 10TB HDDs, which have an areal density of around 0.14 TB per square inch.
No figures are given for transfer speeds, though they describe 200kHz laser pulses, which would be about 75 kB/second - not so dramatic, but it is after all a lab prototype. There are numerous options for speeding this up in commercial products.
If the intention is to provide data for future civilisations, then presumably some "key" discs would be included, with information at various scales describing the technology, equipment, and encoding needed to read the next deeper scale. The larger scales could be inscribed in common human-readable languages, but any civilisation capable of imaging the deepest nanoscopic scales would have no problem decoding well-described binary formats as well.
Archiving suggests write-only, but this paper shows that the technology can be used for rewritable storage as well.
While true, what you say is not particularly relevant to us today. We've been in the current phase for tens of millions of years, and are unlikely to exit this anytime soon - unless perhaps by our own doing.
The planetary biosphere may well eventually flourish, in a much warmer climate. But in the short term (hundreds of years, rather than millions), sudden and drastic changes to temperature such as those we are going through now do not give the biosphere sufficient time to adapt, and mass extinctions are likely to result. Further, we humans must also adapt, which will incur significant costs as we migrate our populations & cities, infrastructure and farmlands, to more favourable locations - and likewise, these costs rise fast if we're forced to adapt quickly. Many economic studies have been done on the financial consequences of climate mitigation vs adaption, and most find mitigation to be considerably cheaper.
If we wanted to encourage a warmer planet, this is far from the optimal way to go about it.
And everyone warmist knew that the so-called "pause" was due to a series of mild La Niñas following the extra-strong El Niño in 1998, but that didn't stop the denialists crowing over it.
Every record-breaking hottest year/month/whatever will be during a strong El Niño; that's obvious, as that's the hottest point in the ENSO cycle. What's important is that this El Niño-boosted January was hotter than every other El Niño-boosted January we've ever seen. Again.
We've had so many hottest-ever records recently that people are apparently getting blasé about them. Reminder: in the absence of a rising trend, record-breaking temperatures become steadily less common - each new record would require an ever-more unlikely confluence of factors to boost temperatures still higher than the last record.
A constant stream of highest-yet record temperatures is more than just weather; it's a rising trend.
Knives have been banned in Australian public places since the 90s, unless you have a "reasonable excuse" to be carrying one, like a picnic, need it for your job, or you're taking it somewhere or whatever. It hasn't proved to be an issue.
Lasers aren't entirely banned here, but you do need a licence for anything over 1mW. I've had some cheap eBay imports confiscated when they tested as stronger than their 1mW description.
If not, then it's a different device than described in the patent, since Claim 1 specifies separate display & computing modules, with the display itself being connected by a hinge. Think "stackable Surface".
It's a patent; only the patent claims matter. Even if TFS has a clickbait headline.
Better avoid every connected device with a mic then, including both mobile and landline phones. Or maybe limit your paranoia to the available evidence.
According to this page, some models do indeed listen for the phrase "Hi TV" after you enable the feature in the settings. When this is detected, a mic icon appears on the screen, and the TV will listen for and send voice data to the recognition servers while that mic icon is present. This isn't "constantly recording and sending", though.
I agree, but this is a potential issue for any device with a mic (even those with FOSS code, unless you're extra careful), and it's been a potential issue for many decades now (with the advent of landline phones at least), so these kind of trust questions are nothing new. I only mean it didn't suddenly become an issue when someone with a Samsung TV noticed their privacy policy.
They provide a Voice Recognition button, on the remote and on the screen. It's off at other times.
From Samsung's privacy policy:
In addition, Samsung may collect and your device may capture voice commands and associated texts so that we can provide you with Voice Recognition features and evaluate and improve the features. Samsung will collect your interactive voice commands only when you make a specific search request to the Smart TV by clicking the activation button either on the remote control or on your screen and speaking into the microphone on the remote control.
Emphasis mine. Check the source, people, not the clickbait blogs.
Who ever said it was constantly recording? Where is there evidence for that? It records only when you click the Voice Recognition button.