It's not quite that bad. The panel can be optimized for the wavelength used and the culminated source can be considerably brighter than the sun. You still need a high power infrared laser.
CALEA requires interception and not backdoor access to any particular device. It is the equivalent of a wiretap. Interception is done on the network itself and the data is forwarded to the requesting law enforcement agency.
I call bullshit on the "cost too much" when you look at the long term for LEDs. Maybe not for every bulb in the house, including ones used a very low percentage of the time, but for those you use as little as 1000 hr/yr (2.73 hr/day), an equivalent LED is a LOT cheaper than a 60 watt incandescent.
But not for any bulb in the house that has an expected lifetime of months because of poor power quality. Those bulbs may be rated for 20,000 hours when powered by pristine instrumentation grade power but out in the field conditions are significantly worse as California recently acknowledged.
The problem with dimming fluorescent lights or any gas discharge tube is the negative resistance characteristic while operating. Fixed voltage ballasts can be made using a capacitor or inductor but for dimming you need something a lot more sophisticated. I am still surprised that fluorescent back-lights in portable electronics are often basically not dimmable because of poor back-light inverter design. That just goes to show how cheap most consumer devices are.
Phase control dimmers work great for resistive loads but not so well for low power factor capacitive loads like you would find in most electronic ballasts. To really get that to work, the ballast rectifier needs power factor correction which adds significantly to the complexity and cost.
How is it conservation when the compact fluorescent replacements burn out within 3 months instead of a year for the incandescent yet cost several times as much? Even California finally noticed that the cost effectiveness of the higher efficiency bulbs was a wash when they started failing significantly below their specified lifetime although of course they do not care.
Like it or not, setting standards of construction, including efficiency standards, is the main reason for building codes.
That may be the justification they give but the more significant reason now is tax collection and rents. In practice the minimum requirements of the building codes become the maximum.
On the contrary, in most cases building codes require you (the builder, that is) to hire engineers, or at least an architect. They usually explicitly disallow construction permits without a licensed architect's stamp on the drawings, and will often require the stamp of an electrical engineer and a mechanical engineer even for a simple house. Requirements about soil properties, earthquakes, hurricanes, or anything beyond a simple house will usually require a structural engineer's stamp, as well.
They require approval from state licensed professional engineers which oddly enough control the licensing of their own profession like lawyers. There is no conflict of interest there.
Not true either -- some digital scopes (the super-high-bandwidth ones) work that way, so all you need is a wicked fast sampling circuit, instead of making the whole thing wicked fast, but most "ordinary" digital scopes are perfectly capable of one-shot captures.
Most digital storage oscilloscopes now have single shot sample rates high enough to support their full bandwidth. Analog to digital converters from 500 MS/s to 2 GS/s and faster have been readily available for years. Only the toy ones are slower. Internally the digital interface to the converter is more difficult now than the analog to digital conversion itself but you can do it with an FPGA.
My old (old enough to drink) slow 20 MS/s and and 100 MS/s DSOs are what I use the most. Of course in equivalent time sampling mode, even they support 2 GS/s.
One problem with most digital storage oscilloscopes is that the dead time between record captures can make elusive behavior difficult to find without special triggering. The digital storage oscilloscopes with the fastest capture rates (and highest prices) are still slower than the fastest obsolete analog oscilloscopes.
And OTOH, most analog scopes I've used, when you use the fastest available horizontal sweep, the beam is dim enough I can't see a single event -- so unless you're using a storage scope or one of those polaroid capture widgets, you're forced to visually average across multiple sweeps here as well.
Some analog oscilloscopes are better than others for that. I have a Tektronix 7834 400 MHz storage scope for that very reason but in direct view mode, a 7904 gives a significantly brighter image. At least two oscilloscopes Tektronix made use a microchannel plate to intensify the CRT image so you actually can watch low repetition rate high sweep speed phenomena without a dim trace.
In the case of the 7104, the combined horizontal and vertical bandwidth support a writing rate faster than the speed of light and you can actually see it even in single shot mode.
That may be reasonable but that is not what the law requires or allows. Whether the complaints are historically false or not is irrelevant for the safe harbor provisions.
Filing a false takedown notice theoretically carries the penalty of perjury (theoretically because in spite of plenty of instances of false takedown notices, it's never been enforced).
This is misleading as the situation is actually much worse than you describe. Only the complaining party must be authorized to act on behalf of the owner under penalty of perjury. The rest of the take down notice is assumed to be accurate:
(vi) A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
The penalties for a false take down notice under 512(f) require the complaining party to have knowledge of misrepresentation of the notice but that is why you have your lawyer sent the complaint and not yourself.
For example, if a party has filed at least 10 claims, has had at least four of them disputed, and has not successfully defended at least 75% of their claims, their infringement requests must then be manually reviewed by youtube staff before a takedown occurs.
There are no provisions in the law for this though.
There are no penalties for false take down requests except if the complaining party is not authorized to act on behalf of the owner.
With frequency hopped spread spectrum, even if some of the hop frequencies are jammed, the transmitted symbols will not necessarily be because they can be spread over multiple hops. It does not have to be a transmitter that dwells on a single frequency long enough to send some information. A single symbol can be spread over multiple hops.
There used to be a NiCd/NiMH prismatic replacement for the AA which was used in small and low profile personal electronics. One problem with those and the newer lithium chemistry prismatic cells is that they can only tolerate much lower internal pressures which compromises their performance compared to cylindrical cells.
One reason rechargeable lithium cells are not individually replaceable is the safety hazard of mismatched cells when they can not be individually monitored. There have been a number of fires in flashlights that use the rechargeable CR123 format cells when cells with different charge conditions were used together. That does not excuse the lack of a design which monitors individual cells and supports charge balancing but such would come at increased cost.
Not necessarily, if they are serious about this (a wishywashy campaign and candidate will, rightfully so, not be covered) and properly deal with the media. Joe Blow the Independent is just that, but the Pirate Party is backed by a large international organization, with a proven track record in Europe. Trying to land a beachhead stateside would be newsworthy and can be expanded to include a little blurb about the War Against Excessive Copyright and the new DCMA exceptions.
The established players have no worries. Plurality voting is sufficient to crush all newcomers.
But it's in a vacuum already. So all you need to do is stick a filament, an emitter, grid, etc onto the craft and away you go. You don't actually need the tube part. That just holds out the atmosphere.
You still need to prevent stray currents from between the tube elements and the surrounding conductors. Circuit boards need insulating coatings although the lower voltages normally associated with solid state circuits helps.
A new *augmented* system is on the way but it only adds to the existing system in a backwards compatible way. Current devices will still work with it just fine and naturally the time scale for deployment is years to decades.
Garmin and the other manufacturers may see a sales boost from replacing old GPS units that will not work with LightSquare's interference but the total economic damage will be greater. Digging holes so you can fill them in is great for employment but bad as productive work.
Dude you've been drinking the koolaid. Spectrum has buffer zones! LightSquared is even adding its own buffer zone out of their spectrum to be sure there is no cross-talk. If a GPS device has a properly tuned antenna then there is no way there can be cross-talk because of the buffer zone. The ONLY way this spectrum could interfere with GPS is if YOUR GPS device was not built to specs. This is highly unlikely with milspec equipment.
The current buffer zone that GPS was designed to operate within is the entire band that LightSquared wants to re-purpose for terrestrial transmission.
Milspec equipment does not have to be built into a hand held portable form factor. The only alternative to a larger form factor is either less sensitivity because of filter losses or insufficient preselection because the filter width is too wide to suppress adjacent terrestrial transmitters when it has to be that physically small.
The FCC GPS receiver specification is part 15 and includes "device must accept interference." Devices up until this time were built with the current RF environment in mind which includes adjacent satellite to ground bands and not terrestrial broadcast bands. I suspect building a receiver able to handle what LighSquared is proposing would require moving away from an integrated direct conversion design to one with less integration and several external IF filters and that is going to be significantly larger.
Military GPS will be fine; they're not the ones who cheaped out on filtering components to save a couple bucks per-unit on hardware. It's civilian GPS that doesn't follow the damn spec and will get hit by this.
The RF filtering components in this case do not exist in a hand held form factor because engineering does not work that way. US policy enforced by ITAR is for civilian GPS receivers to be deliberately easy to jam.
There don't really exist filters good enough to overcome that disparity.
To just to expand on this, the necessary filters do exist but will not fit inside of a handheld form factor without an unacceptable loss in sensitivity or out of band rejection. Duplexers used in cell phones for example are at least 5 times too wide. There are good technical reasons to separate satellite down-link bands from local terrestrial broadcast bands. Someone at the FCC was smoking crack, unqualified, or bought and payed for when they originally approved this.
The one caveat with the above is that the integrated direct conversion receivers that are popular for cost reasons in consumer GPS receivers (and WiFi receivers) have atrocious dynamic range so I can not rule out the possibility that a better receiver topology might work well enough but that is a hell of a lot more than just a filter upgrade. I am tickled pink however that ITAR requirements discourage producing interference resistant GPS receivers so in a way we deserve it if they fail.
Using 380v, which no datacenter device that I know of uses natively (well, maybe the innards of a crt, but that's actually much higher than 380v... AND a deadend tech.), seems kinda... well.... unproductive.
Any datacenter using 120/240 AC power supplies has 340 to 380 volt DC all over the place but it is internal to the power supplies. Most of them will run on 340 to 380 volts DC already without changes.
Oh, certainly. My post was more a question of why everyone else has ignored 48VDC, not why telcos use it.
There are at least two reasons.
Internally, 120/240 volt AC switching power supplies rectify to 340 volts or slightly higher if boost power factor correction is used. They will already work with 380 volts DC although you would want to remove the rectifier or boost PFC circuit since they are not needed.
The other reason is for smaller copper distribution requirements than for 48 volts.
Slashdot Mirror
Forward takes you out, out takes you back, back takes you in, and in takes you forward.
Unless you are suggesting that the planet can tack like a sail
It's not quite that bad. The panel can be optimized for the wavelength used and the culminated source can be considerably brighter than the sun. You still need a high power infrared laser.
CALEA requires interception and not backdoor access to any particular device. It is the equivalent of a wiretap. Interception is done on the network itself and the data is forwarded to the requesting law enforcement agency.
I prefer the term Edison base heating element.
But not for any bulb in the house that has an expected lifetime of months because of poor power quality. Those bulbs may be rated for 20,000 hours when powered by pristine instrumentation grade power but out in the field conditions are significantly worse as California recently acknowledged.
The problem with dimming fluorescent lights or any gas discharge tube is the negative resistance characteristic while operating. Fixed voltage ballasts can be made using a capacitor or inductor but for dimming you need something a lot more sophisticated. I am still surprised that fluorescent back-lights in portable electronics are often basically not dimmable because of poor back-light inverter design. That just goes to show how cheap most consumer devices are.
Phase control dimmers work great for resistive loads but not so well for low power factor capacitive loads like you would find in most electronic ballasts. To really get that to work, the ballast rectifier needs power factor correction which adds significantly to the complexity and cost.
How is it conservation when the compact fluorescent replacements burn out within 3 months instead of a year for the incandescent yet cost several times as much? Even California finally noticed that the cost effectiveness of the higher efficiency bulbs was a wash when they started failing significantly below their specified lifetime although of course they do not care.
That may be the justification they give but the more significant reason now is tax collection and rents. In practice the minimum requirements of the building codes become the maximum.
They require approval from state licensed professional engineers which oddly enough control the licensing of their own profession like lawyers. There is no conflict of interest there.
Most digital storage oscilloscopes now have single shot sample rates high enough to support their full bandwidth. Analog to digital converters from 500 MS/s to 2 GS/s and faster have been readily available for years. Only the toy ones are slower. Internally the digital interface to the converter is more difficult now than the analog to digital conversion itself but you can do it with an FPGA.
My old (old enough to drink) slow 20 MS/s and and 100 MS/s DSOs are what I use the most. Of course in equivalent time sampling mode, even they support 2 GS/s.
One problem with most digital storage oscilloscopes is that the dead time between record captures can make elusive behavior difficult to find without special triggering. The digital storage oscilloscopes with the fastest capture rates (and highest prices) are still slower than the fastest obsolete analog oscilloscopes.
Some analog oscilloscopes are better than others for that. I have a Tektronix 7834 400 MHz storage scope for that very reason but in direct view mode, a 7904 gives a significantly brighter image. At least two oscilloscopes Tektronix made use a microchannel plate to intensify the CRT image so you actually can watch low repetition rate high sweep speed phenomena without a dim trace.
In the case of the 7104, the combined horizontal and vertical bandwidth support a writing rate faster than the speed of light and you can actually see it even in single shot mode.
That may be reasonable but that is not what the law requires or allows. Whether the complaints are historically false or not is irrelevant for the safe harbor provisions.
This is misleading as the situation is actually much worse than you describe. Only the complaining party must be authorized to act on behalf of the owner under penalty of perjury. The rest of the take down notice is assumed to be accurate:
(vi) A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
The penalties for a false take down notice under 512(f) require the complaining party to have knowledge of misrepresentation of the notice but that is why you have your lawyer sent the complaint and not yourself.
There are no provisions in the law for this though.
There are no penalties for false take down requests except if the complaining party is not authorized to act on behalf of the owner.
With frequency hopped spread spectrum, even if some of the hop frequencies are jammed, the transmitted symbols will not necessarily be because they can be spread over multiple hops. It does not have to be a transmitter that dwells on a single frequency long enough to send some information. A single symbol can be spread over multiple hops.
There used to be a NiCd/NiMH prismatic replacement for the AA which was used in small and low profile personal electronics. One problem with those and the newer lithium chemistry prismatic cells is that they can only tolerate much lower internal pressures which compromises their performance compared to cylindrical cells.
One reason rechargeable lithium cells are not individually replaceable is the safety hazard of mismatched cells when they can not be individually monitored. There have been a number of fires in flashlights that use the rechargeable CR123 format cells when cells with different charge conditions were used together. That does not excuse the lack of a design which monitors individual cells and supports charge balancing but such would come at increased cost.
The established players have no worries. Plurality voting is sufficient to crush all newcomers.
You still need to prevent stray currents from between the tube elements and the surrounding conductors. Circuit boards need insulating coatings although the lower voltages normally associated with solid state circuits helps.
I have a pair of Tektronix oscilloscopes that are vacuum tube designs which work fine even though they are significantly older.
That stupid phalanx killed three of my tanks so I am not so sure about this.
A new *augmented* system is on the way but it only adds to the existing system in a backwards compatible way. Current devices will still work with it just fine and naturally the time scale for deployment is years to decades.
Garmin and the other manufacturers may see a sales boost from replacing old GPS units that will not work with LightSquare's interference but the total economic damage will be greater. Digging holes so you can fill them in is great for employment but bad as productive work.
The current buffer zone that GPS was designed to operate within is the entire band that LightSquared wants to re-purpose for terrestrial transmission.
Milspec equipment does not have to be built into a hand held portable form factor. The only alternative to a larger form factor is either less sensitivity because of filter losses or insufficient preselection because the filter width is too wide to suppress adjacent terrestrial transmitters when it has to be that physically small.
The FCC GPS receiver specification is part 15 and includes "device must accept interference." Devices up until this time were built with the current RF environment in mind which includes adjacent satellite to ground bands and not terrestrial broadcast bands. I suspect building a receiver able to handle what LighSquared is proposing would require moving away from an integrated direct conversion design to one with less integration and several external IF filters and that is going to be significantly larger.
I agree.
The RF filtering components in this case do not exist in a hand held form factor because engineering does not work that way. US policy enforced by ITAR is for civilian GPS receivers to be deliberately easy to jam.
To just to expand on this, the necessary filters do exist but will not fit inside of a handheld form factor without an unacceptable loss in sensitivity or out of band rejection. Duplexers used in cell phones for example are at least 5 times too wide. There are good technical reasons to separate satellite down-link bands from local terrestrial broadcast bands. Someone at the FCC was smoking crack, unqualified, or bought and payed for when they originally approved this.
The one caveat with the above is that the integrated direct conversion receivers that are popular for cost reasons in consumer GPS receivers (and WiFi receivers) have atrocious dynamic range so I can not rule out the possibility that a better receiver topology might work well enough but that is a hell of a lot more than just a filter upgrade. I am tickled pink however that ITAR requirements discourage producing interference resistant GPS receivers so in a way we deserve it if they fail.
Any datacenter using 120/240 AC power supplies has 340 to 380 volt DC all over the place but it is internal to the power supplies. Most of them will run on 340 to 380 volts DC already without changes.
There are at least two reasons.
Internally, 120/240 volt AC switching power supplies rectify to 340 volts or slightly higher if boost power factor correction is used. They will already work with 380 volts DC although you would want to remove the rectifier or boost PFC circuit since they are not needed.
The other reason is for smaller copper distribution requirements than for 48 volts.
If they can sabotage nuclear our power plants with frivolous lawsuits, then we can do the same thing to their green projects.