These numbers probably stink. Of course everything depends on what and how you measure and define, but... Let's just see the ratio of people who have actually bought a game in a legit way (of course they may have also pirated some).
Opening up my Steam client you get a nice number saying there are 4.3 million people online at the moment. So a quick check on Google and you come up with a number for the US gamer "population" of 125 mill. About as many for the EU since the population is about the same size (I don't consider Asia, here. Maybe that's a big mistake). 30 mill Steam users comes at about 12%. Now if we consider that not all legit gamers are Steam users this number should go way up!
Yeah. My bet would be on script kiddies as well. This is just somebody trolling the Iranians. The US and Israel tried to stay undetected for as long as possible and in the mean time do as much damage as they possibly could.
Firstly, why is graphene "faster". This is mainly due to the large mobility of electrons and holes in the material. Furthermore, (I'm not sure here) the fact that the channel is only 1 atom thick, means that switching the transistor from one state to the other should be very fast. With graphene, the problem is the lack of a band gap. This means that there is always a current flowing through the device no matter which state it's in (on or off, corresponding to 1 or 0). This is a major drawback if you want to make digital transistors out of them, because the device will always draw power no matter what. Ideally you would want the device to have zero or close to zero current flowing through it in one state and have current flow in the other state. So in order to make a power efficient "digital" transistor from graphene you would need to somehow induce a band gap in the material. There are various ways to do this but none have provided the "breakthrough" the summary mentions. In some cases graphene transistors could be used, for example analog devices, where the above mentioned issues are not problems. This is the case of the 100 GHz transistors that the article mentions. The issue of dissipating heat should be quite different in the case of graphene, because of the materials very good heat transport properties.
Slashdot Mirror
Eating away at the PCB!
Yes.
Yeah. Everything depends on how far down it goes :)
Yeah. You're right. I did miss it.
Here's some more info and a statement from Orbcomm about the satellite. It is indeed in the wrong orbit.
Well apparently the SpaceX update in TFA says otherwise:
there was no effect on Dragon or the cargo resupply mission
Agreed. Science stuff works great (including matplotlib)
typo
It's not like he's not allowed to express his opinion.
Sounds kind of cool.
Yeah. And what's with all the dried up riverbeds?
T-Rex burger anyone?
Agreed.
when data mining and shaping the public opinion are the means to winning.
Tesco stores look remarkably similar to Wall-Mart.
+1 to redundancy in the summary
These numbers probably stink. Of course everything depends on what and how you measure and define, but... Let's just see the ratio of people who have actually bought a game in a legit way (of course they may have also pirated some).
Opening up my Steam client you get a nice number saying there are 4.3 million people online at the moment. So a quick check on Google and you come up with a number for the US gamer "population" of 125 mill. About as many for the EU since the population is about the same size (I don't consider Asia, here. Maybe that's a big mistake). 30 mill Steam users comes at about 12%. Now if we consider that not all legit gamers are Steam users this number should go way up!
I for one welcome our new carbon fiber reinforced universal computing machines!
It's probably done by robots.
Does this have anything to do with the James Webb being over budget.
No it doesn't. You can use the Google authenticator app.
... WTF is this "story" about (beside the obvious) and how is this news for nerds?
I have also recently re read them and I agree with you. As literature, they're pretty bad, but I can see why my tennage mind found it so good.
Whuffie
Yeah. My bet would be on script kiddies as well. This is just somebody trolling the Iranians. The US and Israel tried to stay undetected for as long as possible and in the mean time do as much damage as they possibly could.
Firstly, why is graphene "faster". This is mainly due to the large mobility of electrons and holes in the material. Furthermore, (I'm not sure here) the fact that the channel is only 1 atom thick, means that switching the transistor from one state to the other should be very fast.
With graphene, the problem is the lack of a band gap. This means that there is always a current flowing through the device no matter which state it's in (on or off, corresponding to 1 or 0). This is a major drawback if you want to make digital transistors out of them, because the device will always draw power no matter what. Ideally you would want the device to have zero or close to zero current flowing through it in one state and have current flow in the other state. So in order to make a power efficient "digital" transistor from graphene you would need to somehow induce a band gap in the material. There are various ways to do this but none have provided the "breakthrough" the summary mentions.
In some cases graphene transistors could be used, for example analog devices, where the above mentioned issues are not problems. This is the case of the 100 GHz transistors that the article mentions.
The issue of dissipating heat should be quite different in the case of graphene, because of the materials very good heat transport properties.