Do you have math showing the compression consumes less power than just transmitting the raw data? And that it's less latent to wait for compression than to wait for uncompressed data to finish arriving?
Except when your device is already made with Arduino, and then it needs to do something new that is DSP. Then you need DSP with Arduino. Even if it's "stupid" it might be necessary. Most application development must use the HW already present in its installed base, or die trying.
Since DSP (or rather NSP, since "Native Signal Processing" is what non-DSP CPUs were needed to do when there was no DSP but only a CPU in the installed base) isn't impossible on microcontrollers, just somewhat impractical on many of them. Yet the AVR ATMega is common in Arduino, and includes a HW multiplier that can be used for multiply-accumulate that is the core of DSP:
The component that makes a dedicated digital signal processor (DSP) specially suit- able for signal processing is the Multiply-Accumulate (MAC) unit. This unit is functionally equivalent to a multiplier directly connected to an Arithmetic Logic Unit (ALU). The megaAVR microcontrollers are designed to give the AVR family the ability to effectively perform the same multiply-accumulate operation. This application note will therefore include examples of implementing the MAC operation.
I'm talking about the network, not just where the phone is manufactured. I gave the reasons why it matters in terms of different national laws, not patriotism. You're not even reading what I wrote.
If I were the US president, I wouldn't want my Blackberry to be at the mercy of a South Korean corporation. It's risky enough for a Canadian corp to be running such a sensitive device, but if it's going to be foreign (and so not entirely subject to US laws, and obviously having a national interest that sometimes competes with America's), Canadian is about the least risky. Especially after decades of integration with sensitive US operations, including the space arm on the NASA shuttles. But South Korea is not nearly as reliable, given its understandably different national interests and lower integration with US law. Not to mention the higher stakes in S. Korea with its insane nuke-armed neighbor changing kings and looking for new terms in their permanent war backed by the US.
In any case President Me would rather have an Android phone, with an OS my spooks could inspect with a fine toothed comb, than a closed OS - whether foreign made or not. I wouldn't want Steve Jobs' ghost having secret access to my top-secret iPhone messages, especially when there are so many laws and lawsuits Apple could use my help "fixing". Even just tracking my location through a commercial datacenter seems a breach of national security.
The US has such a large military, and budget to match, that I'd expect the White House to come with our own government smartphones on a secure network. There's no reason my phone couldn't use a gateway device carried by my entourage that goes over a secure military satellite network, even if the gateway is too big for me to carry myself. I don't carry the nuke football, either. But I could carry a civilian smartphone, battery out, in case I was separated from my entourage and as a last resort had to make a call on a public network.
It doesn't take an hour to assemble one, and even in the UK assemblers of these kinds of parts don't make $15 an hour. And don't have 4-5x the latency of products shipped from a planet's width away.
If it's not fully assembled on my receipt, I'd like to assemble it myself and save even more money with an even cheaper device. Why pay for Chinese assemblers and shipping through China?
They're assembling these in Chinese factories. Which are cheap, but not $0. They're shipped from there to the consumers in EU and US (and others), which also costs more than $0 each.
If hobbyists could assemble them ourselves, they could be even cheaper than $25. And it's primarily hobbyists who are their market. How about it?
It's obvious the people need our government to protect our rights from data invasions. The EU has better protections. The US has better basic instructions in the Constitution, but (as far as we know, which is at the core of the problem) worse implementation.
I favor a Constitutional amendment that says "The right of the people to security in their persons, homes, papers and effects is a right to privacy." No more legislative, judicial or executive violations of the 4th Amendment by weasel lawyering. If we can't get an Amendment, then the campaign might settle for a law, which further specifies the rules for deciding cases, which would exclude many precedents violating the right, as in the many egregious violations in the Drug War and in the Terror War.
And indeed accidentally hitting a cyclist you didn't see isn't the same as planning to run someone down who you see in your sights. That's why we have different degrees of murder with different penalties. And stiffer penalties for repeat offenders. It's not OK, but it's not murder 1.
It snows in Winter, when the Sun is low in the sky and the panels need to be tilted close to 90deg to the ground. Snow mostly slides off, especially if the panels are mounted over the edge of the roof, with a dropoff below.
But even in the event that snow or other accumulation obscures the panels, cleaning them is just a matter of expending energy. So yes, their net efficiency is low right when their total input is low (Winter Sun). But there are many panels installed in snowy conditions. Germany has about the most, and it's notoriously snowy. It's also notoriously thrifty, and not in the business of installing panels that are a net loss - even if there are subsidies.
Where does "rational self-interest", AKA (the virtue of) selfishness, draw the line? Who is to say what is exploitation? Rupert Murdoch? The bankers at AIG?
I read Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead years ago, and after I recovered from the fiction and thought about it as philosophy I realized that Rand's Objectivism, or even just its practically applicable values, assign selfishness as the only virtue. It's inhuman in demonizing compassion and sharing where the only gain is one's feeling of helping ("altruism").
It looks like Rossi is relying on secrecy and some kind of mechanism to prevent close inspection of the mechanisms, rather than patent.
So I hope you're right, if it works. And if it works, I still expect that Rossi's first mover advantage will make a huge return on his investment, simply by preordering many generators even at the low prices he's claiming.
So if it works, it would not only provide even cheaper and more sustainable energy than for the last century, but it would demonstrate the similarly archaic patent regime that just holds everything back.
What he says is that the 10KW plants use a different tech than the 1MW plants, and that the 10KW plants' tech scales better in manufacturing.
FWIW, even if a 1MW plant costs more than 100 10KW plants, there could be other benefits to the 1MW plant. Even fusion consumes fuel, which in this case seems to be nickel, and perhaps the 1MW tech is more nickel-efficient. There's also possibly a size (volume) efficiency; a 1 MW plant could be smaller than 100 10KW plants, though if the 10KW units are residential sized a 1MW plant at 10x10 residential ones isn't going to be very big compared to the very big conventional plants it would replace. It also seems that an external electricity supply is necessary to keep the production going (these plants create heat, not electricity), which might be less efficient in the big plant vs the small plant, which could mean a lot of extra electrical equipment for the larger scale.
There are also possibly manufacturing scale economies for millions of 10KW plants that aren't initially achievable for the smaller volume of 1MW plants expected to be produced.
It could all be a scam. But they claim to be shipping devices now, and supposedly all will be revealed sometime this year. We can speculate, but soon enough we'll probably know.
Can the 3D data models this SW generates be fed into a machine that cranks out a physical model? With RC aircraft becoming so cheap, it might be cool to use the SW to design a craft that can be rendered in matter, then outfitted with the RC parts. Maybe some RC derbies could use standardized mechanics in different bodies, competing purely on the body design.
No it's not good enough in most jurisdictions. "Vehicular manslaughter" is the conviction when the defense is "I didn't see them", but you should have.
Excellent. I want it all recorded. And I insist on my 4th Amendment rights to privacy in my "papers and effects", as well as my 5th Amendment rights not to be forced to incriminate myself. So I can reveal the recordings to defend myself, but nobody can force me to allow them to be used against me.
I'd rather glance at dashboard displays surrounding the windshield, so I don't have to move my head to see them through the steering wheel. If the car also had 360 cameras to drop the borders display to reveal anything detected traveling towards the car's cabin that the displays would block, the displays would only add to the safety. In fact such a feature would highlight moving risks, overall much safer than just the current windshield/dashboard config.
And put all driver controls on the steering wheel, showing on the windshield display when the fingers are close to them for totally head-forward use.
Oh, and make every car install as standard a Bluetooth adapter that overrides any phone's onboard mic/speaker, forcing all phones into speakerphones until switched back on the phone (presumably only by passengers).
The car should do whatever it can to ensure the only display the driver attends is the windshield.
Are you aware that the subject of the sentence is the military in various aspects I'm specifying? Sentences don't have a transitive property by which a word common to various of its clauses can be factored out.
Of course I know what the USO does. I'm all for it, which is why I'm OK with spending my tax money on it (directly, and in its tax exemption). It offloads work that the direct Pentagon budget would have to spend on to keep morale in our troops, especially the way we abuse them with lying them into wars, forced retention, cut benefits after the action, etc. That is how the USO subsidizes the military. Take off your blinders on how we spend money on the military every which way.
No, Florida Republican, do not give the loose change to the military service corporation. I know you want to ensure that all money goes to one kind of military subsidy or another. But you created the TSA, with its vast budgets largely wasted on abusing Americans and subsidizing contractors. Its security theater subsidizes the military by pretending to protect us, while militarizing routine travel which of course paves the way for more military and more military subsidies. Making the military further dependent on the TSA's unnecessary operations that generate that loose change further ensures we'll be doing TSA dances forever.
Keeping the loose change reducing the debt spending you created its budget out of is an efficiency. Leave well enough alone, despite your grabby Florida Republican instinct to make a bad thing even worse, and forever.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you have math showing the compression consumes less power than just transmitting the raw data? And that it's less latent to wait for compression than to wait for uncompressed data to finish arriving?
Except when your device is already made with Arduino, and then it needs to do something new that is DSP. Then you need DSP with Arduino. Even if it's "stupid" it might be necessary. Most application development must use the HW already present in its installed base, or die trying.
Since DSP (or rather NSP, since "Native Signal Processing" is what non-DSP CPUs were needed to do when there was no DSP but only a CPU in the installed base) isn't impossible on microcontrollers, just somewhat impractical on many of them. Yet the AVR ATMega is common in Arduino, and includes a HW multiplier that can be used for multiply-accumulate that is the core of DSP:
Meanwhile, new Arduino Due boards include ARM processors with HW multipliers.
Even if the processor/microcontroller has no HW MAC, it can do DSP - just less efficiently. If its application needs DSP, it can do it.
Unless the developer just insists it's stupid. Then the Arduino cannot do it. But not because of the chip.
Has research established a theoretical minimum amount of joules required to transmit one bit of info, at the limits of computation?
If I were the president I wouldn't want to carry two phones. Or have any of my conversations tappable by someone not in my spook department.
I'm talking about the network, not just where the phone is manufactured. I gave the reasons why it matters in terms of different national laws, not patriotism. You're not even reading what I wrote.
If I were the US president, I wouldn't want my Blackberry to be at the mercy of a South Korean corporation. It's risky enough for a Canadian corp to be running such a sensitive device, but if it's going to be foreign (and so not entirely subject to US laws, and obviously having a national interest that sometimes competes with America's), Canadian is about the least risky. Especially after decades of integration with sensitive US operations, including the space arm on the NASA shuttles. But South Korea is not nearly as reliable, given its understandably different national interests and lower integration with US law. Not to mention the higher stakes in S. Korea with its insane nuke-armed neighbor changing kings and looking for new terms in their permanent war backed by the US.
In any case President Me would rather have an Android phone, with an OS my spooks could inspect with a fine toothed comb, than a closed OS - whether foreign made or not. I wouldn't want Steve Jobs' ghost having secret access to my top-secret iPhone messages, especially when there are so many laws and lawsuits Apple could use my help "fixing". Even just tracking my location through a commercial datacenter seems a breach of national security.
The US has such a large military, and budget to match, that I'd expect the White House to come with our own government smartphones on a secure network. There's no reason my phone couldn't use a gateway device carried by my entourage that goes over a secure military satellite network, even if the gateway is too big for me to carry myself. I don't carry the nuke football, either. But I could carry a civilian smartphone, battery out, in case I was separated from my entourage and as a last resort had to make a call on a public network.
It doesn't take an hour to assemble one, and even in the UK assemblers of these kinds of parts don't make $15 an hour. And don't have 4-5x the latency of products shipped from a planet's width away.
If it's not fully assembled on my receipt, I'd like to assemble it myself and save even more money with an even cheaper device. Why pay for Chinese assemblers and shipping through China?
They're assembling these in Chinese factories. Which are cheap, but not $0. They're shipped from there to the consumers in EU and US (and others), which also costs more than $0 each.
If hobbyists could assemble them ourselves, they could be even cheaper than $25. And it's primarily hobbyists who are their market. How about it?
It's obvious the people need our government to protect our rights from data invasions. The EU has better protections. The US has better basic instructions in the Constitution, but (as far as we know, which is at the core of the problem) worse implementation.
I favor a Constitutional amendment that says "The right of the people to security in their persons, homes, papers and effects is a right to privacy." No more legislative, judicial or executive violations of the 4th Amendment by weasel lawyering. If we can't get an Amendment, then the campaign might settle for a law, which further specifies the rules for deciding cases, which would exclude many precedents violating the right, as in the many egregious violations in the Drug War and in the Terror War.
BTW: nice to agree with you :).
And indeed accidentally hitting a cyclist you didn't see isn't the same as planning to run someone down who you see in your sights. That's why we have different degrees of murder with different penalties. And stiffer penalties for repeat offenders. It's not OK, but it's not murder 1.
It snows in Winter, when the Sun is low in the sky and the panels need to be tilted close to 90deg to the ground. Snow mostly slides off, especially if the panels are mounted over the edge of the roof, with a dropoff below.
But even in the event that snow or other accumulation obscures the panels, cleaning them is just a matter of expending energy. So yes, their net efficiency is low right when their total input is low (Winter Sun). But there are many panels installed in snowy conditions. Germany has about the most, and it's notoriously snowy. It's also notoriously thrifty, and not in the business of installing panels that are a net loss - even if there are subsidies.
Where does "rational self-interest", AKA (the virtue of) selfishness, draw the line? Who is to say what is exploitation? Rupert Murdoch? The bankers at AIG?
I read Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead years ago, and after I recovered from the fiction and thought about it as philosophy I realized that Rand's Objectivism, or even just its practically applicable values, assign selfishness as the only virtue. It's inhuman in demonizing compassion and sharing where the only gain is one's feeling of helping ("altruism").
It looks like Rossi is relying on secrecy and some kind of mechanism to prevent close inspection of the mechanisms, rather than patent.
So I hope you're right, if it works. And if it works, I still expect that Rossi's first mover advantage will make a huge return on his investment, simply by preordering many generators even at the low prices he's claiming.
So if it works, it would not only provide even cheaper and more sustainable energy than for the last century, but it would demonstrate the similarly archaic patent regime that just holds everything back.
What he says is that the 10KW plants use a different tech than the 1MW plants, and that the 10KW plants' tech scales better in manufacturing.
FWIW, even if a 1MW plant costs more than 100 10KW plants, there could be other benefits to the 1MW plant. Even fusion consumes fuel, which in this case seems to be nickel, and perhaps the 1MW tech is more nickel-efficient. There's also possibly a size (volume) efficiency; a 1 MW plant could be smaller than 100 10KW plants, though if the 10KW units are residential sized a 1MW plant at 10x10 residential ones isn't going to be very big compared to the very big conventional plants it would replace. It also seems that an external electricity supply is necessary to keep the production going (these plants create heat, not electricity), which might be less efficient in the big plant vs the small plant, which could mean a lot of extra electrical equipment for the larger scale.
There are also possibly manufacturing scale economies for millions of 10KW plants that aren't initially achievable for the smaller volume of 1MW plants expected to be produced.
It could all be a scam. But they claim to be shipping devices now, and supposedly all will be revealed sometime this year. We can speculate, but soon enough we'll probably know.
What about stuffing the physical model with the guts from a cheap RC aircraft?
Can the 3D data models this SW generates be fed into a machine that cranks out a physical model? With RC aircraft becoming so cheap, it might be cool to use the SW to design a craft that can be rendered in matter, then outfitted with the RC parts. Maybe some RC derbies could use standardized mechanics in different bodies, competing purely on the body design.
False.
No it's not good enough in most jurisdictions. "Vehicular manslaughter" is the conviction when the defense is "I didn't see them", but you should have.
Excellent. I want it all recorded. And I insist on my 4th Amendment rights to privacy in my "papers and effects", as well as my 5th Amendment rights not to be forced to incriminate myself. So I can reveal the recordings to defend myself, but nobody can force me to allow them to be used against me.
I'd rather glance at dashboard displays surrounding the windshield, so I don't have to move my head to see them through the steering wheel. If the car also had 360 cameras to drop the borders display to reveal anything detected traveling towards the car's cabin that the displays would block, the displays would only add to the safety. In fact such a feature would highlight moving risks, overall much safer than just the current windshield/dashboard config.
And put all driver controls on the steering wheel, showing on the windshield display when the fingers are close to them for totally head-forward use.
Oh, and make every car install as standard a Bluetooth adapter that overrides any phone's onboard mic/speaker, forcing all phones into speakerphones until switched back on the phone (presumably only by passengers).
The car should do whatever it can to ensure the only display the driver attends is the windshield.
Are you aware that the subject of the sentence is the military in various aspects I'm specifying? Sentences don't have a transitive property by which a word common to various of its clauses can be factored out.
Of course I know what the USO does. I'm all for it, which is why I'm OK with spending my tax money on it (directly, and in its tax exemption). It offloads work that the direct Pentagon budget would have to spend on to keep morale in our troops, especially the way we abuse them with lying them into wars, forced retention, cut benefits after the action, etc. That is how the USO subsidizes the military. Take off your blinders on how we spend money on the military every which way.
Also said, that applies even better to the TSA, is "penny wise, dollar foolish".
No, Florida Republican, do not give the loose change to the military service corporation. I know you want to ensure that all money goes to one kind of military subsidy or another. But you created the TSA, with its vast budgets largely wasted on abusing Americans and subsidizing contractors. Its security theater subsidizes the military by pretending to protect us, while militarizing routine travel which of course paves the way for more military and more military subsidies. Making the military further dependent on the TSA's unnecessary operations that generate that loose change further ensures we'll be doing TSA dances forever.
Keeping the loose change reducing the debt spending you created its budget out of is an efficiency. Leave well enough alone, despite your grabby Florida Republican instinct to make a bad thing even worse, and forever.