He didn't say they should create a disposable building. He suggested they could build a movable building, like a retractable dome.
It's not the greatest idea, though. They'd be limited to assembling one vehicle at a time on each pad. With the existing VAB and crawler to move the vehicles, they can theoretically assemble several in advance, and store them.
No! Using anything to cool it below the dew point is horrible advice! Keeping it colder than the dew point will cause condensation to form inside the device's case once it's exposed to ambient temperature air. Consider that if it would be cold enough to fog your eyeglasses, it's equally damp enough to damage the device. If the device isn't thoroughly dried out before being powered on the condensate will cause the circuits to short or corrode, and fail. (And yes, humid air can carry enough dust to ionize the water to the point where it conducts electricity - water from dew is not the same as distilled water.)
But you probably don't need to worry at all. Ambient temperatures of 60C/140F are not likely to hurt your devices if they're not running. That's not nearly hot enough to damage semiconductors like ICs, transistors, or resistors. The only components even close to being at risk would be electrolytic capacitors, but if you're talking tiny devices like iPhones and such, most use surface mount tantalum caps, which are also heat resistant. Rechargeable batteries are designed to take some amount of heat as well.
If you still feel you must keep them somewhat cooler, keep a styrofoam cooler in the trunk. Drop the devices in it and seat the lid, then put it back in the trunk (not in the passenger compartment, where the glass causes temperatures to rise much higher.) The insulation will be adequate to keep them at ambient temps for longer than the four hours you mentioned.
There's another cost the article didn't consider. That is the risk of losing the data due to the failure of a poor FDE implementation.
Our story is that we still have a lot of XP machines that are protected by our corporate-chosen FDE system, McAfee's Safeboot. Not that long ago some HQ team rolled out a BIOS upgrade. Turns out that on our development team's machines, which are some big honking desk towers (not portable laptops that tend to be stolen in coffee shops), the BIOS upgrade nuked Safeboot's ability to load its keys. So we had a dozen developers lose their boxes thanks to FDE. Of course extra special thanks go out to the corporate numbskulls who were "just following policy" when they allowed the faulty BIOS upgrade to continue after discovering the first bricked system a day early!
One dozen developers times 40 hours each to rebuild their dev environments, plus whatever projects they were on falling behind by a week each, that's a lot of money wasted. And the risk they averted? These towers are the opposite of portable. They're cabled to the cube walls, and the cases are padlocked shut. They have source code on them, not customer data. In short, these are among the least risky boxes in the company, in terms of the types of losses FDE is intended to guard against.
Of course, if you carry the math all the way through, this screwup only added a few dollars to each FDE (maybe from $388 to $392 or so) yet the overall risks of loss by theft remain at $4650, so it's still a net positive to have FDE. But it sure is a pain in the ass.
Not that long ago, 4chan would have done it for teh lulz. Statements like that are to them like a red flag is to a bull. However, they're all butthurt now because of the crackdowns on Anonymous, so I don't think they'd mess too much with a government agency anymore.
That's the idea behind patents. They aren't kept secret, so you can be free to publish anything that you want about them - but they are still owned by the rightsholder. The real question you could ask your advisor is if you are free to build a product or a business around this research, or if he is free to do so. If not, then it's likely the patent rights are owned by someone who is not your advisor.
Assuming it's Google, your advisor may still be free to monetize them. Whether or not Google attempts to defend them in court is a completely different issue. Google may only hold patents on the research ensuring that nobody else is in a position to clamp down on their execution. If so, that's a good thing.
You do realize that at the bottom of your project's page you list your sponsors, and they include Google. Did you carefully read the terms of the grant? It wouldn't surprise me if they own some kinds of rights to your work.
Sue. The ADA applies regardless of whether you're talking about ramps to national monuments, or screen reader accessible websites for the blind. (At least here in America.)
realistically the feat is completely void of any application.
Void of a "human pedal-powered helicopter" application is not the same as void of "any" application. Even if no practical human flight comes from it, challenges that foster experiments like these can drive new materials application and development. Perhaps someone figured out how to make a lighter weight carbon fiber tube as a result, or a new adhesive, or even a more efficient motor-generator technology, all in an attempt to gain just that little bit more lift. Or maybe someone figured out a new light weight food that maximizes rapid absorption producing peak human energy output for a two minute window.
If you're hoping this experiment will yield a mass-produced pedal-powered helicopter to take you to work every morning, agreed, we're all going to remain disappointed for some time to come. But maybe the resultant engineering will mean your next car will get an extra few miles out of the gas tank. Or maybe one of these students will make a breakthrough in rooftop windmills as a result. We just don't know it yet, and that's why these are so exciting. But it's certainly premature to say it's void of any application.
Actually, I think this case stopped having anything to do with guilt or innocence a while ago.
Once this case got blown out of proportion, the government changed tack. What they then wanted from this case is for ordinary people to say "hell, I'm not telling a joke about acts of terror, remember that guy they screwed over?" Nobody's going to remember the verdict, but we'll all remember the two years of crap this guy got.
Sure, the twitterverse is temporarily full of stupid people reposting this twat's tweet. But that will quickly die down now that the circus is over. So they'll happily settle for the chilling effect of their Orwellian response, and not have to deal with so many of these boors in the future.
I remember reading about clinical trials for some lifesaving drug a while ago. As they were going through the trials, they realized that the drug group was experiencing a very high survival rate, something like 90%+ cured, while the control group continued to experience mortality at the expected rates. They suspended the trials early, and provided the control group with the actual drug, citing humanitarian reasons.
It's possible that they could do the same for this drug. More likely, really, as South Africa probably doesn't have the same requirements as the US FDA for approving new drugs.
Yes but what is the intersection of the total number of people who own iPhones and music/production broadcasting types who work with tape? I think skeuomorphic designs only really make some sense when the thing they are mimicking is more universal in understanding, otherwise you are just adding a layer of confusion.
The problem is that most technology is now digital. Every action you take on a digital machine does one thing: it changes the values of some memory bits. Recording a song? Stored in bits, and not even on a particular technology. Reading a book? Screen bits are changed. People won't get it if every icon is an identical arrow-pointing-at-a-field-of-1s-and-0s. We have to settle on ways to represent them uniquely.
History serves for some, such as storing audio seems to have settled upon the reel-to-reel icon. Some aren't based in history, though. Recording in general is a button with a red circle, especially in the context of a Stop button with a square, and a right facing arrow button for Playback.
These icons have evolved from historical representations to pure symbols, and the symbols are now doing their jobs. It no longer matters who used or uses tape - only the symbol matters now.
Look at it the other way: take a kid who has grown up only with the O_O icon, and they probably wouldn't even recognize that shape represents magnetic tape reels even if they were looking at a picture of a reel to reel tape deck. To them, the symbol is purely a representation of recorded audio. There is no confusion to them.
Canon's special purpose, nameless OS now includes WiFi support on certain camera models, like the ELPH 320HS. It incorporates the ability to connect to a PC/Smartphone/Tablet, and upload your shots directly to their servers, while automatically cross posting it to facebook or other social sites.
That said, Canon made it work, but nobody said it would be easy. You practically need a degree in wireless network engineering to set it all up - if you want to experience marital disharmony, try explaining the difference between ad hoc and infrastructure modes to your wife some day. Actually using it is OK, once it's configured for a particular network. And it has Canon optics, which haven't disappointed me yet, so for a subcompact 16MP camera, it's not bad. But their networking configuration interface has a long way to go before it's anything you'd call friendly. Their touch screen interface is also very 0.7b - it's nowhere near an iPhone or an Android; it's not even on par with the newer Chinese iClones. I believe Android would be a huge improvement to this device, even if it was overkill. The one thing this device does much better than any phone OS is it boots from no battery to lens-extended and photo-ready in under two seconds.
Decisive does not mean hamfisted, or pounding the stick like it owes you money. It simply means confidence.
I've seen kids learning who take it out of second gear, then contemplate the H pattern, then push it over, then tentatively push it sort-of up, then let up on the clutch to the sound of unmeshed gears, then push a little harder... Confidence means moving the stick where it has to go in a timely fashion. Getting a learner past that hurdle is a key step in learning stick.
You ignored the details of the GP post. He wasn't trying to qualify for NASCAR, he wasn't learning in a BMW, he wasn't trying out to be the next Jason Statham. He needed to pass a driver's license test, and he believed he did it thanks to the dreamworld. At that initial stage of learning, matching RPMs is barely even required, as driving test examiners aren't judging proficiency, just adequacy. And acquiring that much skill on a stick really takes no more than a practice drive or two.
The more plausible answer is that you simply aren't stupid. The light weight of the vehicle, the noisy engine (you sure don't need a tach in a Bug), and simple H-pattern made the VW Beetle one of the easiest of all manual transmissions to drive.
Sticks are actually very easy to learn, despite their undeserved reputation. The only skill most people lack is confidence - once they understand that the pedal takes a smooth touch, but the gear lever takes a decisive action, they're good to go.
I also learned to drive stick in my dad's VW Beetle. It took a practice drive or two to figure out the action of the clutch, and that was it. So when you practiced once or twice with your yelling sister, that was probably all you really needed.
Bug spray would be censorship, denying all traffic along that route. Anteaters would be like IDP appliances, zapping some packets it thinks are suspicious (or tasty.) Fire ants would be a DDoS attack. And cars would be like a congested router, wiping out packets indiscriminately.
The analysts figured that exploits only come out an average of four times a year, therefore they only need to send updates every quarter. Who can question the CIO's master stroke of logic?
I agree that he would probably have considered it hype as well, but I disagree that he wasn't in the same class. He inspired a generation of kids to become engineers, pilots, and astronauts. He rallied the entire globe around a peaceful cause. He was a leader. And he was the face of NASA, and the proud face of what America was capable of. And in 1969, in the middle of the Cold War and the Vietnam War, amidst huge problems around the country with race riots in Watts and Minneapolis and Chicago and Baltimore, here was this Great American Hero that we could all agree had made a remarkable achievement. We needed Neil Armstrong to be who he was.
While I'm curious as to the application, it's his data rates that ultimately count, not our opinions of if he's doing it right.
500GB may sound like a lot to us, but the LHC spews something like that with every second of operation. They have a large cluster of machines whose job it is to pre-filter that data and only record the "interesting" collisions. Perhaps the OP would consider pre-filtering as much as possible before dumping it into this server as well. If this is for a limited 12 week research project, maybe they already have all the storage they need. Or maybe they are doing the filtering on the server before committing the data to long term storage. They just dump the 500GB of raw data into a landing zone on the server, filter it, and keep only the relevant few GB.
Regarding mesh networking, they'd have to build a large custom network of expensive radios to carry that volume of data. Given the distances mentioned, it's not like they could build it out of 802.11 radios. Terrain might also be an issue, with mountains and valleys to contend with, and sensors placed near to access roads. That kind of expense would not make sense for a temporary installation.
I don't think he's an idiot. I just think he couldn't give us enough details about what he's working on.
Slashdot Mirror
He didn't say they should create a disposable building. He suggested they could build a movable building, like a retractable dome.
It's not the greatest idea, though. They'd be limited to assembling one vehicle at a time on each pad. With the existing VAB and crawler to move the vehicles, they can theoretically assemble several in advance, and store them.
I would boycott these assholes if I'd ever heard of them.
I'd just say fork 'em.
I'm just glad she's not running from the problem.
ice. or a frozen lunch pack. done and done.
No! Using anything to cool it below the dew point is horrible advice! Keeping it colder than the dew point will cause condensation to form inside the device's case once it's exposed to ambient temperature air. Consider that if it would be cold enough to fog your eyeglasses, it's equally damp enough to damage the device. If the device isn't thoroughly dried out before being powered on the condensate will cause the circuits to short or corrode, and fail. (And yes, humid air can carry enough dust to ionize the water to the point where it conducts electricity - water from dew is not the same as distilled water.)
But you probably don't need to worry at all. Ambient temperatures of 60C/140F are not likely to hurt your devices if they're not running. That's not nearly hot enough to damage semiconductors like ICs, transistors, or resistors. The only components even close to being at risk would be electrolytic capacitors, but if you're talking tiny devices like iPhones and such, most use surface mount tantalum caps, which are also heat resistant. Rechargeable batteries are designed to take some amount of heat as well.
If you still feel you must keep them somewhat cooler, keep a styrofoam cooler in the trunk. Drop the devices in it and seat the lid, then put it back in the trunk (not in the passenger compartment, where the glass causes temperatures to rise much higher.) The insulation will be adequate to keep them at ambient temps for longer than the four hours you mentioned.
There's another cost the article didn't consider. That is the risk of losing the data due to the failure of a poor FDE implementation.
Our story is that we still have a lot of XP machines that are protected by our corporate-chosen FDE system, McAfee's Safeboot. Not that long ago some HQ team rolled out a BIOS upgrade. Turns out that on our development team's machines, which are some big honking desk towers (not portable laptops that tend to be stolen in coffee shops), the BIOS upgrade nuked Safeboot's ability to load its keys. So we had a dozen developers lose their boxes thanks to FDE. Of course extra special thanks go out to the corporate numbskulls who were "just following policy" when they allowed the faulty BIOS upgrade to continue after discovering the first bricked system a day early!
One dozen developers times 40 hours each to rebuild their dev environments, plus whatever projects they were on falling behind by a week each, that's a lot of money wasted. And the risk they averted? These towers are the opposite of portable. They're cabled to the cube walls, and the cases are padlocked shut. They have source code on them, not customer data. In short, these are among the least risky boxes in the company, in terms of the types of losses FDE is intended to guard against.
Of course, if you carry the math all the way through, this screwup only added a few dollars to each FDE (maybe from $388 to $392 or so) yet the overall risks of loss by theft remain at $4650, so it's still a net positive to have FDE. But it sure is a pain in the ass.
It'd be pretty hard to spoof it..
Not that long ago, 4chan would have done it for teh lulz. Statements like that are to them like a red flag is to a bull. However, they're all butthurt now because of the crackdowns on Anonymous, so I don't think they'd mess too much with a government agency anymore.
Target was sued by the National Federation of the Blind several years ago. They settled for $6 million dollars, paid the NFB's legal costs of $3.7 million, and made their shopping website accessible. If a Fortune 500 company, with all the lawyers money can buy, can lose an ADA case like that, so can any other big company.
That's the idea behind patents. They aren't kept secret, so you can be free to publish anything that you want about them - but they are still owned by the rightsholder. The real question you could ask your advisor is if you are free to build a product or a business around this research, or if he is free to do so. If not, then it's likely the patent rights are owned by someone who is not your advisor.
Assuming it's Google, your advisor may still be free to monetize them. Whether or not Google attempts to defend them in court is a completely different issue. Google may only hold patents on the research ensuring that nobody else is in a position to clamp down on their execution. If so, that's a good thing.
You do realize that at the bottom of your project's page you list your sponsors, and they include Google. Did you carefully read the terms of the grant? It wouldn't surprise me if they own some kinds of rights to your work.
I have no idea what the disabled will have to do.
Sue. The ADA applies regardless of whether you're talking about ramps to national monuments, or screen reader accessible websites for the blind. (At least here in America.)
realistically the feat is completely void of any application.
Void of a "human pedal-powered helicopter" application is not the same as void of "any" application. Even if no practical human flight comes from it, challenges that foster experiments like these can drive new materials application and development. Perhaps someone figured out how to make a lighter weight carbon fiber tube as a result, or a new adhesive, or even a more efficient motor-generator technology, all in an attempt to gain just that little bit more lift. Or maybe someone figured out a new light weight food that maximizes rapid absorption producing peak human energy output for a two minute window.
If you're hoping this experiment will yield a mass-produced pedal-powered helicopter to take you to work every morning, agreed, we're all going to remain disappointed for some time to come. But maybe the resultant engineering will mean your next car will get an extra few miles out of the gas tank. Or maybe one of these students will make a breakthrough in rooftop windmills as a result. We just don't know it yet, and that's why these are so exciting. But it's certainly premature to say it's void of any application.
Actually, I think this case stopped having anything to do with guilt or innocence a while ago.
Once this case got blown out of proportion, the government changed tack. What they then wanted from this case is for ordinary people to say "hell, I'm not telling a joke about acts of terror, remember that guy they screwed over?" Nobody's going to remember the verdict, but we'll all remember the two years of crap this guy got.
Sure, the twitterverse is temporarily full of stupid people reposting this twat's tweet. But that will quickly die down now that the circus is over. So they'll happily settle for the chilling effect of their Orwellian response, and not have to deal with so many of these boors in the future.
I remember reading about clinical trials for some lifesaving drug a while ago. As they were going through the trials, they realized that the drug group was experiencing a very high survival rate, something like 90%+ cured, while the control group continued to experience mortality at the expected rates. They suspended the trials early, and provided the control group with the actual drug, citing humanitarian reasons.
It's possible that they could do the same for this drug. More likely, really, as South Africa probably doesn't have the same requirements as the US FDA for approving new drugs.
Yes but what is the intersection of the total number of people who own iPhones and music/production broadcasting types who work with tape? I think skeuomorphic designs only really make some sense when the thing they are mimicking is more universal in understanding, otherwise you are just adding a layer of confusion.
The problem is that most technology is now digital. Every action you take on a digital machine does one thing: it changes the values of some memory bits. Recording a song? Stored in bits, and not even on a particular technology. Reading a book? Screen bits are changed. People won't get it if every icon is an identical arrow-pointing-at-a-field-of-1s-and-0s. We have to settle on ways to represent them uniquely.
History serves for some, such as storing audio seems to have settled upon the reel-to-reel icon. Some aren't based in history, though. Recording in general is a button with a red circle, especially in the context of a Stop button with a square, and a right facing arrow button for Playback.
These icons have evolved from historical representations to pure symbols, and the symbols are now doing their jobs. It no longer matters who used or uses tape - only the symbol matters now.
Look at it the other way: take a kid who has grown up only with the O_O icon, and they probably wouldn't even recognize that shape represents magnetic tape reels even if they were looking at a picture of a reel to reel tape deck. To them, the symbol is purely a representation of recorded audio. There is no confusion to them.
Canon's special purpose, nameless OS now includes WiFi support on certain camera models, like the ELPH 320HS. It incorporates the ability to connect to a PC/Smartphone/Tablet, and upload your shots directly to their servers, while automatically cross posting it to facebook or other social sites.
That said, Canon made it work, but nobody said it would be easy. You practically need a degree in wireless network engineering to set it all up - if you want to experience marital disharmony, try explaining the difference between ad hoc and infrastructure modes to your wife some day. Actually using it is OK, once it's configured for a particular network. And it has Canon optics, which haven't disappointed me yet, so for a subcompact 16MP camera, it's not bad. But their networking configuration interface has a long way to go before it's anything you'd call friendly. Their touch screen interface is also very 0.7b - it's nowhere near an iPhone or an Android; it's not even on par with the newer Chinese iClones. I believe Android would be a huge improvement to this device, even if it was overkill. The one thing this device does much better than any phone OS is it boots from no battery to lens-extended and photo-ready in under two seconds.
So they deleted the phone button?
If you miss it, you can install skype on it from the Android Market.
Decisive does not mean hamfisted, or pounding the stick like it owes you money. It simply means confidence.
I've seen kids learning who take it out of second gear, then contemplate the H pattern, then push it over, then tentatively push it sort-of up, then let up on the clutch to the sound of unmeshed gears, then push a little harder... Confidence means moving the stick where it has to go in a timely fashion. Getting a learner past that hurdle is a key step in learning stick.
You ignored the details of the GP post. He wasn't trying to qualify for NASCAR, he wasn't learning in a BMW, he wasn't trying out to be the next Jason Statham. He needed to pass a driver's license test, and he believed he did it thanks to the dreamworld. At that initial stage of learning, matching RPMs is barely even required, as driving test examiners aren't judging proficiency, just adequacy. And acquiring that much skill on a stick really takes no more than a practice drive or two.
That's because RF engineering requires divine intervention. Antenna design is about as close as an EE can get to magic or voodoo! :-)
The more plausible answer is that you simply aren't stupid. The light weight of the vehicle, the noisy engine (you sure don't need a tach in a Bug), and simple H-pattern made the VW Beetle one of the easiest of all manual transmissions to drive.
Sticks are actually very easy to learn, despite their undeserved reputation. The only skill most people lack is confidence - once they understand that the pedal takes a smooth touch, but the gear lever takes a decisive action, they're good to go.
I also learned to drive stick in my dad's VW Beetle. It took a practice drive or two to figure out the action of the clutch, and that was it. So when you practiced once or twice with your yelling sister, that was probably all you really needed.
A single ant is pretty much just a stupid state machine, more like a neuron with legs. It takes a whole colony to exhibit this behavior.
Therefore we can conclude that ants discovered modular design, object oriented programming, and the state pattern millions of years ago, right?
Bug spray would be censorship, denying all traffic along that route. Anteaters would be like IDP appliances, zapping some packets it thinks are suspicious (or tasty.) Fire ants would be a DDoS attack. And cars would be like a congested router, wiping out packets indiscriminately.
The analysts figured that exploits only come out an average of four times a year, therefore they only need to send updates every quarter. Who can question the CIO's master stroke of logic?
I agree that he would probably have considered it hype as well, but I disagree that he wasn't in the same class. He inspired a generation of kids to become engineers, pilots, and astronauts. He rallied the entire globe around a peaceful cause. He was a leader. And he was the face of NASA, and the proud face of what America was capable of. And in 1969, in the middle of the Cold War and the Vietnam War, amidst huge problems around the country with race riots in Watts and Minneapolis and Chicago and Baltimore, here was this Great American Hero that we could all agree had made a remarkable achievement. We needed Neil Armstrong to be who he was.
While I'm curious as to the application, it's his data rates that ultimately count, not our opinions of if he's doing it right.
500GB may sound like a lot to us, but the LHC spews something like that with every second of operation. They have a large cluster of machines whose job it is to pre-filter that data and only record the "interesting" collisions. Perhaps the OP would consider pre-filtering as much as possible before dumping it into this server as well. If this is for a limited 12 week research project, maybe they already have all the storage they need. Or maybe they are doing the filtering on the server before committing the data to long term storage. They just dump the 500GB of raw data into a landing zone on the server, filter it, and keep only the relevant few GB.
Regarding mesh networking, they'd have to build a large custom network of expensive radios to carry that volume of data. Given the distances mentioned, it's not like they could build it out of 802.11 radios. Terrain might also be an issue, with mountains and valleys to contend with, and sensors placed near to access roads. That kind of expense would not make sense for a temporary installation.
I don't think he's an idiot. I just think he couldn't give us enough details about what he's working on.