We have a huge country. No matter how fair and rigorous are our election laws, we're going to have the sampling error that even our basic science cannot avoid. So those election laws should require that elections be won by greater than the margin of error.
A 2% victory on one Tuesday in November that governs 2, 4 or 6 years, especially with the power of incumbency multiplying all those terms, is a recipe for an ungovernable populace. A do-over (eliminating minor candidates proven not to be viable to win) would not only produce a more reliable result, but most importantly it would eliminate much of the claims of the loser's voters that their candidate was the winner, and therefore refuse to recognize the winner's authority.
Democratic elections are much more important for gaining the consent of the governed than for picking the best official. Any official who actually best represents the population would never fear a repeat of their winning vote.
We're talking about a scenario where the sensor is mounted outside, not integrated with, the ship. In that case, the only possible medium is the escaping gas, which isn't enough to conduct sound everywhere outside the ship. The inside mounting was treated completely in an earlier message in this thread.
Which global flood 4Kya? And why would you think fossil bones shrink or grow? Does this have something to do with the schools in Missouri, or some Mark Twain society?
Re:But Does It Run Linux?
on
ZOMG New Zunes
·
· Score: 1
No, because those SliMP3 devices cost L179, which is $365, while these Zunes cost $150-200.
But only if there's enough gas to form a medium between the leak and the detector. Unless the entire surface is coated with the detector, then small leaks (with serious consequences over time) can't be detected. And coating with a sensor could use much cheaper and simpler tech.
They can't mount this sensor outside the craft pointing in, because the intervening empty space carries no sound energy.
But if they mount it internally, it could find not only leaks, but also target where that hideous alien creature is hiding after it's eaten the ship's cat.
The article says these dinosaurs were Cretaceous. Piperno and Sues say grass fed Cretaceous dinosaurs. I don't think the Earth was as barren as you think.
Re:But Does It Run Linux?
on
ZOMG New Zunes
·
· Score: 1
It looks like those Barix devices cost at least $180. Are their DACs at least as good as, say, a $50 PC soundcard (which all have at least 5.1 output)? How does the audio quality compare to a Zune, or a PSP (which can do what I want)?
If it's not open/hackable, I don't want to rely on its vendor supporting it for 5+ years.
Practically whenever I see dinosaurs depicted in movies, TV or other mass media, they're shown living in deserts, among volcanoes, as if their environment were the same then as it is now, when we find their fossils in those harsh conditions. Since species go extinct when they're not fit to survive a changed environment, I expect they didn't actually live in places that looked like that.
This "new" dinosaur was found in a desert, near the Grand Staircase. Does the Staircase predate the death of these dinosaurs? Was it a desert when they died, or was it fertile? What did these ancient landscapes, including ones we're used to seeing amidst desert, really look like when dinosaurs roamed them?
Can I hack my Zune so it doesn't run some MS OS, but rather Linux, or some other OS I can trust?
I want cheap little "LAN -> audio" device for my home streaming system. All it has to do is take incoming shoutcast streams and play them out an audio connection (miniplug/headphone, RCA, 5.1, 7.1, whatever) into which I can plug some powered speakers, or (at worst) a full stereo amplifier. But not a device that will tell me what to play, or rat me out to MS, or open a secret hole in my network I'll never find until it's cracked.
This robbery comes right after Francis Coppola's data archive was robbed. "Who's Robbing the Great Directors of Hollywood" sounds like a great premise for a movie. Too bad it'll never be faithful to the original, As Seen on Slashdot.
the law is aimed at catching terrorists, pedophiles, and hardened criminals
Then why doesn't it say that explicitly in the law? Why not say that these rules can be used only to enforce those specific charges in that group, and not just to spy on the rest of us, who make up 99.99+% of the people?
Which is why you're babbling about DSP, when phased arrays actually use more actual signals, then apply some necessary DSP to compare those multiple incoming signals.
Slashdot: a cesspool of conceited technobabblers who don't know enough what they're talking about to recognize someone who does.
It depends on the MIMO tech used in WiMAX. I don't know exactly how it's implemented. But it would need to be implemented explicitly to recover lots of info from the incoming signals that I don't expect WiMAX does. It's probably more an extra set of tech (components, interconnects and software) than a fundamental difference. But I'd be impressed if it could be just a SW revision to the existing MIMO to work properly. In fact, such convenience would inspire a conspiracy theory:).
No, not "only then". There is a need for phased arrays because of the limits of single frequency signaling and its registration requirements, even before those requirements are eliminated.
This isn't a real chicken/egg problem, even though there is one possible circular dependency. The phased arrays have other reasons for demand than just replacing the registration system.
I can tell which of two identical phones are ringing in different parts of a room. And the frequency ranges are questions of degree.
I just debunked the offered multipath problem that was claimed to not affect visible frequencies, and pointed out how it's already solved in that range, too. You haven't backed up your assertions, except to repeat them in a different analogy that I've now shot down just as easily. It's obvious that you're offering the kind of Slashdot argument that never ends, no matter how overwhelmed you are by the refutation.
Just because you can't do it doesn't mean its impossible. Don't bother keeping me posted on how your primitive comprehension is keeping you in the dark.
I'm just saying that phased arrays are one kind of MIMO. WiMAX is using a little MIMO tech. If it used more MIMO tech, specifically the phased arrays we're discussing, it wouldn't necessarily need the higher frequencies and other features to get higher bandwidth. Though getting them all would be nice.
You're not even reading the other posts where I debunk all you complaints. When you understand comms theory, and more importantly recent engineering that exploits it, then come back and try talking with your superior air. Until then, all I could possibly learn from you would be stubborn ignorance. To which I turn a blind eye.
The most recent reference to the comparative functions of the optic tract (including the retina) was in fact in a "Computer Vision" magazine article I read at the digital camera company in the Spring of 1990. If I get a chance to dig up more bio details from my old (1988) neurology textbook I'll try to post it.
The "eye" is an extremely sensitive optical receiver and processor, an array of much smaller detector cells. Rod cells respond to even single visible photons - realize that vision biochemistry is related to photosynthesis, which is more ancient and therefore "primitive", but still features close to 100% energy efficiency converting photonic power into stored chemistry. Retinal rod and cone cells are larger than the ~650nm wavelength of light they detect, but they each have multiple detectors. The arrays we're talking about have ample mechanisms to extract lots of info from incoming visible signals.
But also realize that we don't have to match human visual acuity for phased arrays to distinguish sufficiently separated transmitters. I bet if we looked at the parallax distance necessary for smallish arrays, say 16x16, of the cheapest detectors, we could find that local networks, say within the 100m that a WiFi AP typically covers, could distinguish unique signals among many 802.11b transmitters on the same frequency for a lot less than $2500 (256 * $10). We're looking for something better than "planaria vision", but not much better. That should be obtainable, and probably a more productive route than just upping the power and frequency to centralized, "one eyed" WiMAX. Since WiMAX already uses MIMO, getting full service from WiMAX with phased arrays could finally mean that "the air" is no longer a narrower, single channel with which wires and fibers easily compete in bandwidth delivery.
it'd be better if companies like this opened their products because they truly believed in openness, rather than to beat the competition over the head.
Why? Who cares why they open their products? Even if they do it just because "open" is a marketing buzzword they don't understand, then it's still open.
If you care why they do it because you want to be sure their products stay open, then competition is probably the best way. Except of course the part where the open products inspire a community which buy their products because their openness makes them more usable.
But favoring openness that relies on some immaterial "belief" in some slippery ideology is a recipe for failure in the marketplace. And therefore not only failure of that product, but also stigmatizing the openness with the fallout from relying on naive ideologues to support future openness.
Actually, having studied the retina and optic tract in the neurology part of my premed undergrad, as well as in my physics minor, and then again in the digital camera company I joined rather than med school, I can tell you that the incident light's phase difference info has artifacts in the waveforms of the retina's neural signals. Those signals are decoded in higher layers of the visual cortex that the optic nerve eventually innervates.
Wikipedia's MIMO article isn't very good (for radio engineers), but the fact is that phased arrays are one kind of MIMO, so that Wikipedia article is sufficient documentation. I think that if you consider how the eye does use plenty of positional difference signals in distinguishing different features in the visual field, you might find your work has access to more existing examples for guidance.
Another example of more primitive phased arrays is the pair of human ears, which use much more extensive postprocessing in the brain to differentiate remote sources despite multipath. Bats excel, but humans have been demonstrated to instinctively use "sonar" when it's available, despite multipath and may other sources of noise and distraction.
Your response to my comparison of multipath in human vision to that in radio networks is also shows limited vision. They are both internal reflections along multiple paths of the same frequencies that intelligent arrays of receivers can distinguish into their original separate sources.
You're thinking too much inside the box. If you don't want to try making it work, don't bother, but don't try to force your limits on others who could make it work.
None of those are much better than the lame flying cars we sometimes see demo'ed. If they had little OLEDs like the one we're discussing, they might actually be worth using - wrist video calling.
Slashdot Mirror
We have a huge country. No matter how fair and rigorous are our election laws, we're going to have the sampling error that even our basic science cannot avoid. So those election laws should require that elections be won by greater than the margin of error.
A 2% victory on one Tuesday in November that governs 2, 4 or 6 years, especially with the power of incumbency multiplying all those terms, is a recipe for an ungovernable populace. A do-over (eliminating minor candidates proven not to be viable to win) would not only produce a more reliable result, but most importantly it would eliminate much of the claims of the loser's voters that their candidate was the winner, and therefore refuse to recognize the winner's authority.
Democratic elections are much more important for gaining the consent of the governed than for picking the best official. Any official who actually best represents the population would never fear a repeat of their winning vote.
What's "AIU"?
We're talking about a scenario where the sensor is mounted outside, not integrated with, the ship. In that case, the only possible medium is the escaping gas, which isn't enough to conduct sound everywhere outside the ship. The inside mounting was treated completely in an earlier message in this thread.
Which global flood 4Kya? And why would you think fossil bones shrink or grow? Does this have something to do with the schools in Missouri, or some Mark Twain society?
No, because those SliMP3 devices cost L179, which is $365, while these Zunes cost $150-200.
But only if there's enough gas to form a medium between the leak and the detector. Unless the entire surface is coated with the detector, then small leaks (with serious consequences over time) can't be detected. And coating with a sensor could use much cheaper and simpler tech.
No, in other words, whatever fed those Cretaceous dinosaurs was enough like grass that we're not making any distinction.
The scale of Anonymous Cowards' ability to just create shit from shinola is epochal.
They can't mount this sensor outside the craft pointing in, because the intervening empty space carries no sound energy.
But if they mount it internally, it could find not only leaks, but also target where that hideous alien creature is hiding after it's eaten the ship's cat.
The article says these dinosaurs were Cretaceous. Piperno and Sues say grass fed Cretaceous dinosaurs. I don't think the Earth was as barren as you think.
It looks like those Barix devices cost at least $180. Are their DACs at least as good as, say, a $50 PC soundcard (which all have at least 5.1 output)? How does the audio quality compare to a Zune, or a PSP (which can do what I want)?
If it's not open/hackable, I don't want to rely on its vendor supporting it for 5+ years.
Practically whenever I see dinosaurs depicted in movies, TV or other mass media, they're shown living in deserts, among volcanoes, as if their environment were the same then as it is now, when we find their fossils in those harsh conditions. Since species go extinct when they're not fit to survive a changed environment, I expect they didn't actually live in places that looked like that.
This "new" dinosaur was found in a desert, near the Grand Staircase. Does the Staircase predate the death of these dinosaurs? Was it a desert when they died, or was it fertile? What did these ancient landscapes, including ones we're used to seeing amidst desert, really look like when dinosaurs roamed them?
Can I hack my Zune so it doesn't run some MS OS, but rather Linux, or some other OS I can trust?
I want cheap little "LAN -> audio" device for my home streaming system. All it has to do is take incoming shoutcast streams and play them out an audio connection (miniplug/headphone, RCA, 5.1, 7.1, whatever) into which I can plug some powered speakers, or (at worst) a full stereo amplifier. But not a device that will tell me what to play, or rat me out to MS, or open a secret hole in my network I'll never find until it's cracked.
Can I make a new Zune do that?
This robbery comes right after Francis Coppola's data archive was robbed. "Who's Robbing the Great Directors of Hollywood" sounds like a great premise for a movie. Too bad it'll never be faithful to the original, As Seen on Slashdot.
Then why doesn't it say that explicitly in the law? Why not say that these rules can be used only to enforce those specific charges in that group, and not just to spy on the rest of us, who make up 99.99+% of the people?
Which is why you're babbling about DSP, when phased arrays actually use more actual signals, then apply some necessary DSP to compare those multiple incoming signals.
Slashdot: a cesspool of conceited technobabblers who don't know enough what they're talking about to recognize someone who does.
It depends on the MIMO tech used in WiMAX. I don't know exactly how it's implemented. But it would need to be implemented explicitly to recover lots of info from the incoming signals that I don't expect WiMAX does. It's probably more an extra set of tech (components, interconnects and software) than a fundamental difference. But I'd be impressed if it could be just a SW revision to the existing MIMO to work properly. In fact, such convenience would inspire a conspiracy theory :).
No, not "only then". There is a need for phased arrays because of the limits of single frequency signaling and its registration requirements, even before those requirements are eliminated.
This isn't a real chicken/egg problem, even though there is one possible circular dependency. The phased arrays have other reasons for demand than just replacing the registration system.
I can tell which of two identical phones are ringing in different parts of a room. And the frequency ranges are questions of degree.
I just debunked the offered multipath problem that was claimed to not affect visible frequencies, and pointed out how it's already solved in that range, too. You haven't backed up your assertions, except to repeat them in a different analogy that I've now shot down just as easily. It's obvious that you're offering the kind of Slashdot argument that never ends, no matter how overwhelmed you are by the refutation.
Just because you can't do it doesn't mean its impossible. Don't bother keeping me posted on how your primitive comprehension is keeping you in the dark.
I'm just saying that phased arrays are one kind of MIMO. WiMAX is using a little MIMO tech. If it used more MIMO tech, specifically the phased arrays we're discussing, it wouldn't necessarily need the higher frequencies and other features to get higher bandwidth. Though getting them all would be nice.
You're not even reading the other posts where I debunk all you complaints. When you understand comms theory, and more importantly recent engineering that exploits it, then come back and try talking with your superior air. Until then, all I could possibly learn from you would be stubborn ignorance. To which I turn a blind eye.
The most recent reference to the comparative functions of the optic tract (including the retina) was in fact in a "Computer Vision" magazine article I read at the digital camera company in the Spring of 1990. If I get a chance to dig up more bio details from my old (1988) neurology textbook I'll try to post it.
The "eye" is an extremely sensitive optical receiver and processor, an array of much smaller detector cells. Rod cells respond to even single visible photons - realize that vision biochemistry is related to photosynthesis, which is more ancient and therefore "primitive", but still features close to 100% energy efficiency converting photonic power into stored chemistry. Retinal rod and cone cells are larger than the ~650nm wavelength of light they detect, but they each have multiple detectors. The arrays we're talking about have ample mechanisms to extract lots of info from incoming visible signals.
But also realize that we don't have to match human visual acuity for phased arrays to distinguish sufficiently separated transmitters. I bet if we looked at the parallax distance necessary for smallish arrays, say 16x16, of the cheapest detectors, we could find that local networks, say within the 100m that a WiFi AP typically covers, could distinguish unique signals among many 802.11b transmitters on the same frequency for a lot less than $2500 (256 * $10). We're looking for something better than "planaria vision", but not much better. That should be obtainable, and probably a more productive route than just upping the power and frequency to centralized, "one eyed" WiMAX. Since WiMAX already uses MIMO, getting full service from WiMAX with phased arrays could finally mean that "the air" is no longer a narrower, single channel with which wires and fibers easily compete in bandwidth delivery.
Yeah, and if I wanted one that I could wear around the house, I could just strap a princess phone to my wrist with a really long cord.
Mobile phone design really is a cinch!
Why? Who cares why they open their products? Even if they do it just because "open" is a marketing buzzword they don't understand, then it's still open.
If you care why they do it because you want to be sure their products stay open, then competition is probably the best way. Except of course the part where the open products inspire a community which buy their products because their openness makes them more usable.
But favoring openness that relies on some immaterial "belief" in some slippery ideology is a recipe for failure in the marketplace. And therefore not only failure of that product, but also stigmatizing the openness with the fallout from relying on naive ideologues to support future openness.
Actually, having studied the retina and optic tract in the neurology part of my premed undergrad, as well as in my physics minor, and then again in the digital camera company I joined rather than med school, I can tell you that the incident light's phase difference info has artifacts in the waveforms of the retina's neural signals. Those signals are decoded in higher layers of the visual cortex that the optic nerve eventually innervates.
Wikipedia's MIMO article isn't very good (for radio engineers), but the fact is that phased arrays are one kind of MIMO, so that Wikipedia article is sufficient documentation. I think that if you consider how the eye does use plenty of positional difference signals in distinguishing different features in the visual field, you might find your work has access to more existing examples for guidance.
Another example of more primitive phased arrays is the pair of human ears, which use much more extensive postprocessing in the brain to differentiate remote sources despite multipath. Bats excel, but humans have been demonstrated to instinctively use "sonar" when it's available, despite multipath and may other sources of noise and distraction.
Phased arrays are one kind of MIMO antenna.
Your response to my comparison of multipath in human vision to that in radio networks is also shows limited vision. They are both internal reflections along multiple paths of the same frequencies that intelligent arrays of receivers can distinguish into their original separate sources.
You're thinking too much inside the box. If you don't want to try making it work, don't bother, but don't try to force your limits on others who could make it work.
None of those are much better than the lame flying cars we sometimes see demo'ed. If they had little OLEDs like the one we're discussing, they might actually be worth using - wrist video calling.