Well, #1 I think it is a delusion that you get more "bits" out of the music if you use all of them. I've never heard music get clearer or richer using that philosophy.
Umm, what? Play any CD track after truncating it to 8 bits of resolution and tell me that using only 8 bits doesn't make it way less clearer. If you are playing a live concert where you should set your reproduction to give 90dB sound pressure peaks as if you were in the audience, and there's quiet stuff going on where the original sound pressure was around 40dB (quiet conversation), you're listening to it reproduced as if through an 8 bit D/A converter.
One problem I see is how is this data protected from tampering. They need a correctly designed, executed and audited scheme of digitally signing the records when they're created. Otherwise anyone can modify data in such a database, and how would anyone know?
Oh yeah, but guess what they will do. They'll pretend that each car has only one driver, because many cars do so. Then they'll harass every car owner who happens not to have a valid drivers' license at the time their database report got generated. And then they'll say "oh, but it's a very small minority of car owners and we have a right to verify anyway". And so it goes.
So, if a corporation would do that, it's OK, but if a govt. does it, it's not? I think it's time to decide either way and make the choice apply to everyone...
Yes. And I believe it's OK to do so. He's not tracking down the families of the dead and joking straight into their faces, you know. Jokes on/. are fine.
I know someone who has been through the process, and I can sum it up thusly: there's a "good" reason why houses to be sold in the U.S. have to be staged with furniture and other props -- even though you buy empty walls. Somehow, many people absolutely can't imagine a place just looking at plans, or empty walls. The bank people were in the same ballpark. They'd look at the renderings, say it looks nice, and that was it. No examination of what was inside the walls or anything like that. The house would arguably be an easy sell, since it looks gorgeous. The house's structure was fairly nontraditional and had more in common with one-off fancy commercial construction (steel structure with some curved beams on a cast concrete foundation), but otherwise it looked quite normal from the outside and most of the inside.
Hmm, that's not a bad idea. There's a quarry a couple miles away, I'll have to ask them how much it costs. I can always do exterior walls out of stone!
I agree. If I were to build a U.S.-style wood-framed house today, I'd probably frame with 2x6 lumber for walls, seasoned for a couple years and refinished to a smaller size (2x5 perhaps) to make each stud/beam/plate perfectly straight. Then every piece would be cut to length on a simple CNC-fed saw, according to a bill of materials that lists every piece of framing lumber needed. It's all a matter of engineering the process right, I'm sure it could be done fairly affordably and provide an excellent end product. I'm learning by doing lots of work on our current home, but the plan is to sell in 18-20 years and then build our own, from scratch.
I'm toying with setting up some finite beam element models to fix shape of each header/joist for neutral deformation when under target load. That way each horizontal beam will be flat when the house is finished and furnished. I need a CNC wood saw and a CNC joint planer, but hey, I've got about 10 years to prototype everything, then a couple years to get the plans and get all the wood for it to season out.
At least in the U.S., banks don't care at all how the house will look, and whether it's "traditional" or not. I don't think most banks' mortgage units have anyone competent to make heads or tails out of architectural plans as part of their job. All the bank cares about is that the construction is done legally -- with permits and approved plans. I doubt it's any different elsewhere in the world, although I'd like to stand corrected.
That Monsanto plastic house was a real joke when it comes to fire safety. I cringe when building codes allow plastic foam (usually polystyrene) ceiling tiles -- in a fire, the first thing that will happen is molten plastic dripping on you as you try to make your escape. But give me a break -- a place where all surfaces will melt when exposed to heat, will support the combustion, and will injure you on contact? WTF? That's perhaps a good example of marketing people who have no real insight into what they're trying to sell.
Even though I think that the U.S. residential wood-framed housing is somewhat too much on the flammable side, having walls and ceilings drywalled is a good thing. Hardwood floors help with firespread, compared to carpet. Wood generally degrades fairly gracefully when overloaded, say due to fire reducing cross-sectional area. Thermoplastic structures would be a comparative disaster -- everything gets soft and droopy once things get hot. Thermoset will pretend everything is allright until it fails catastrophically, IIRC.
Has anyone built such a thing and done fire tests on it? Especially a side-by-side test with standard U.S. wood framed, drywalled structure?
It won't do it with 8 people in it. Its mass would go up by at least 30%, that's enough to push it over 3 seconds. It's a fairly barebones, lightened-up design, that makes it very sensitive to loading.
The electric motor will easily outlast the driver, even if you start driving at age 16 and keep on driving continuously for your entire lifetime. My only concern is that his radial load on the motor's output side bearing has factor of safety of 1.0, that's too close to my taste. He may need to replace that bearing in a couple of years; the motor will be otherwise fine.
Heat pipe only does heat transport, so what you said is true about thermal resistances somewhat, but otherwise makes no sense. It's like comparing car tires to cars. You stll need to extract the heat out of the heat pipe, and for that this device would rock compared to stationary heat sinks.
I find the claim of 7% power reduction country wide a bit dubious. On a desktop, you use a few watts to run fans on a machine that does ~75W idle, and hundreds of watts under load. On a home AC unit, you're looking at a 150W fan cooling a several kW compressor.
On a 2U server, I've measured it: the fans, running on a hot day when the office is at ~26C, are pulling about 50W. Noisy as hell, too.
The major win here is a combination of things: lower motor power consumption and higher thermal efficiency of the thermodynamic cycle in the HVAC system, as the heatsink thermal resistance is down by a major factor. In a home AC unit, the thermal resistance of the heatsink (internal and external!) figures directly in the equation for the efficiency of the unit!
Are you telling us that the whole darn radial motor was rotating? Still, it's not exactly the same: in case of the radial motor, the source of heat would be rotating as well; here there is a major element that is absent in a radial motor with rotating cylinders. Namely, the heat-transferring air bearing. Of course, the combustion gases in an ICE do exchange heat with cylinder walls and piston. Yet, to make it truly equivalent to the new design, you'd need something like burning pistons that then exchange heat with gas, that then dump the heat into the cylinders.
Look silly, proof is in the pudding. Off-the-shelf CPU coolers have about 0.8C/W thermal resistances, this thing has demonstrated 0.2C/W in version 1 prototype, and version 2 is estimated to lower it to 0.1C/W.
How well do bearings conduct heat?
An air bearing? Very fucking well. So much so that its thermal resistance is an order of magnitude lower than the thermal resistance of the heatsink-to-air!
Nope, the "connection" is a thin (1E-5m) air gap experiencing high shearing and thus providing very low thermal resistance. The gap's thermal resistance contributes very little (on the order of 10%) to the overall thermal resistance of the cooler. It is a truly revolutionary design, no shit here.
I've read the paper and what you said is just silly, not insightful. The heat sink is separated from the base plate by a layer of air on the order of 1E-5m thick. This layer of air experiences large shear stress that keeps its thermal resistance low. It's basically an air bearing for the spinning heat sink. The stackup is thus:
1. CPU 2. Disk-shaped base plate 3. Air gap 4. Heat sink impeller
The major difference is that in normal coolers, fan has no heat dissipating function at al. There's no functional heat flow through the fan. In this design, the fan is the heatsink: heat does flow through it, and that's what makes it work so well.
From what I can tell, it's a truly revolutionary device. It has 5-10x lower thermal resistance than regular coolers, consumes ~5x less power than coolers of same capacity, and generates less acoustic noise to boot (it wasn't quantified, though). Ah, and also it doesn't get fouled by dust: ever notice how in usual CPU coolers the fan is usually clean or just sprinked with dust, when the heatsink is pretty much plugged with dust? In this device, the heatsink spins, so it stays clean, just like a fan would.
Whoever commercializes this for the HVAC market will be financially set, as in "playboy mansion" financially set:)
Still skirting the IRB question -- someone, please?
I never even alluded to publishing under a made up name, so I don't know where that came from.
As for the "academic career": some people don't care, they have good industry jobs and do academia just for the fun of it. I know a couple of them, and whenever they publish something that comes out of their industrial research, they (rightly so) publish under their industrial affiliation. In academia they either teach or run research labs where grads do research, and their name gets tacked on at the end of the author list if they believe they've substantially contributed to the paper. Otherwise they have enough integrity not to. Perhaps that's a rare trait.
There's way too many people out there for everybody to "know" everybody else. If you have a brand new author, they can indicate whatever affiliation they wish and noone would know otherwise. Heck, even if you are working, say, at a University, and even are well known in your field, you're free to publish under a different affiliation if the research was not done in your capacity at the University. Many people who hold academic and industrial jobs publish like that. So, if you publish research done in affiliation with MegaCorp, who's tho enforce the IRB participation? You haven't answered the main question I had.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, #1 I think it is a delusion that you get more "bits" out of the music if you use all of them. I've never heard music get clearer or richer using that philosophy.
Umm, what? Play any CD track after truncating it to 8 bits of resolution and tell me that using only 8 bits doesn't make it way less clearer. If you are playing a live concert where you should set your reproduction to give 90dB sound pressure peaks as if you were in the audience, and there's quiet stuff going on where the original sound pressure was around 40dB (quiet conversation), you're listening to it reproduced as if through an 8 bit D/A converter.
One problem I see is how is this data protected from tampering. They need a correctly designed, executed and audited scheme of digitally signing the records when they're created. Otherwise anyone can modify data in such a database, and how would anyone know?
Oh yeah, but guess what they will do. They'll pretend that each car has only one driver, because many cars do so. Then they'll harass every car owner who happens not to have a valid drivers' license at the time their database report got generated. And then they'll say "oh, but it's a very small minority of car owners and we have a right to verify anyway". And so it goes.
So, if a corporation would do that, it's OK, but if a govt. does it, it's not? I think it's time to decide either way and make the choice apply to everyone...
Yes. And I believe it's OK to do so. He's not tracking down the families of the dead and joking straight into their faces, you know. Jokes on /. are fine.
So, eventually they would just all die out, right? Well, I think that's problem solved in a generation or two. No women => no reproduction.
I know someone who has been through the process, and I can sum it up thusly: there's a "good" reason why houses to be sold in the U.S. have to be staged with furniture and other props -- even though you buy empty walls. Somehow, many people absolutely can't imagine a place just looking at plans, or empty walls. The bank people were in the same ballpark. They'd look at the renderings, say it looks nice, and that was it. No examination of what was inside the walls or anything like that. The house would arguably be an easy sell, since it looks gorgeous. The house's structure was fairly nontraditional and had more in common with one-off fancy commercial construction (steel structure with some curved beams on a cast concrete foundation), but otherwise it looked quite normal from the outside and most of the inside.
Bzzzt, no. The encrypted data is tied to each chip's unique identifier. Each of those EEPROMs is programmed with a unique image, AFAIK.
Hmm, that's not a bad idea. There's a quarry a couple miles away, I'll have to ask them how much it costs. I can always do exterior walls out of stone!
I agree. If I were to build a U.S.-style wood-framed house today, I'd probably frame with 2x6 lumber for walls, seasoned for a couple years and refinished to a smaller size (2x5 perhaps) to make each stud/beam/plate perfectly straight. Then every piece would be cut to length on a simple CNC-fed saw, according to a bill of materials that lists every piece of framing lumber needed. It's all a matter of engineering the process right, I'm sure it could be done fairly affordably and provide an excellent end product. I'm learning by doing lots of work on our current home, but the plan is to sell in 18-20 years and then build our own, from scratch.
I'm toying with setting up some finite beam element models to fix shape of each header/joist for neutral deformation when under target load. That way each horizontal beam will be flat when the house is finished and furnished. I need a CNC wood saw and a CNC joint planer, but hey, I've got about 10 years to prototype everything, then a couple years to get the plans and get all the wood for it to season out.
At least in the U.S., banks don't care at all how the house will look, and whether it's "traditional" or not. I don't think most banks' mortgage units have anyone competent to make heads or tails out of architectural plans as part of their job. All the bank cares about is that the construction is done legally -- with permits and approved plans. I doubt it's any different elsewhere in the world, although I'd like to stand corrected.
That Monsanto plastic house was a real joke when it comes to fire safety. I cringe when building codes allow plastic foam (usually polystyrene) ceiling tiles -- in a fire, the first thing that will happen is molten plastic dripping on you as you try to make your escape. But give me a break -- a place where all surfaces will melt when exposed to heat, will support the combustion, and will injure you on contact? WTF? That's perhaps a good example of marketing people who have no real insight into what they're trying to sell.
Even though I think that the U.S. residential wood-framed housing is somewhat too much on the flammable side, having walls and ceilings drywalled is a good thing. Hardwood floors help with firespread, compared to carpet. Wood generally degrades fairly gracefully when overloaded, say due to fire reducing cross-sectional area. Thermoplastic structures would be a comparative disaster -- everything gets soft and droopy once things get hot. Thermoset will pretend everything is allright until it fails catastrophically, IIRC.
Has anyone built such a thing and done fire tests on it? Especially a side-by-side test with standard U.S. wood framed, drywalled structure?
What a great find, thank you! Short of calling it internet, he got it perfectly right.
It won't do it with 8 people in it. Its mass would go up by at least 30%, that's enough to push it over 3 seconds. It's a fairly barebones, lightened-up design, that makes it very sensitive to loading.
It's like complaining the Toyota Prius can't go 0 to 60 in 3 secs and can't carry 8 people.
I think that the only vehicles that'd fit into those specs are called airplanes. Catapult launched carrier versions, to be specific.
The electric motor will easily outlast the driver, even if you start driving at age 16 and keep on driving continuously for your entire lifetime. My only concern is that his radial load on the motor's output side bearing has factor of safety of 1.0, that's too close to my taste. He may need to replace that bearing in a couple of years; the motor will be otherwise fine.
Heat pipe only does heat transport, so what you said is true about thermal resistances somewhat, but otherwise makes no sense. It's like comparing car tires to cars. You stll need to extract the heat out of the heat pipe, and for that this device would rock compared to stationary heat sinks.
Yeah, when they are "dusty", the heatsink is all plugged up. I'll take dusty over plugged up any day.
I find the claim of 7% power reduction country wide a bit dubious. On a desktop, you use a few watts to run fans on a machine that does ~75W idle, and hundreds of watts under load. On a home AC unit, you're looking at a 150W fan cooling a several kW compressor.
On a 2U server, I've measured it: the fans, running on a hot day when the office is at ~26C, are pulling about 50W. Noisy as hell, too.
The major win here is a combination of things: lower motor power consumption and higher thermal efficiency of the thermodynamic cycle in the HVAC system, as the heatsink thermal resistance is down by a major factor. In a home AC unit, the thermal resistance of the heatsink (internal and external!) figures directly in the equation for the efficiency of the unit!
Are you telling us that the whole darn radial motor was rotating? Still, it's not exactly the same: in case of the radial motor, the source of heat would be rotating as well; here there is a major element that is absent in a radial motor with rotating cylinders. Namely, the heat-transferring air bearing. Of course, the combustion gases in an ICE do exchange heat with cylinder walls and piston. Yet, to make it truly equivalent to the new design, you'd need something like burning pistons that then exchange heat with gas, that then dump the heat into the cylinders.
Look silly, proof is in the pudding. Off-the-shelf CPU coolers have about 0.8C/W thermal resistances, this thing has demonstrated 0.2C/W in version 1 prototype, and version 2 is estimated to lower it to 0.1C/W.
How well do bearings conduct heat?
An air bearing? Very fucking well. So much so that its thermal resistance is an order of magnitude lower than the thermal resistance of the heatsink-to-air!
Nope, the "connection" is a thin (1E-5m) air gap experiencing high shearing and thus providing very low thermal resistance. The gap's thermal resistance contributes very little (on the order of 10%) to the overall thermal resistance of the cooler. It is a truly revolutionary design, no shit here.
I've read the paper and what you said is just silly, not insightful. The heat sink is separated from the base plate by a layer of air on the order of 1E-5m thick. This layer of air experiences large shear stress that keeps its thermal resistance low. It's basically an air bearing for the spinning heat sink. The stackup is thus:
1. CPU
2. Disk-shaped base plate
3. Air gap
4. Heat sink impeller
The major difference is that in normal coolers, fan has no heat dissipating function at al. There's no functional heat flow through the fan. In this design, the fan is the heatsink: heat does flow through it, and that's what makes it work so well.
From what I can tell, it's a truly revolutionary device. It has 5-10x lower thermal resistance than regular coolers, consumes ~5x less power than coolers of same capacity, and generates less acoustic noise to boot (it wasn't quantified, though). Ah, and also it doesn't get fouled by dust: ever notice how in usual CPU coolers the fan is usually clean or just sprinked with dust, when the heatsink is pretty much plugged with dust? In this device, the heatsink spins, so it stays clean, just like a fan would.
Whoever commercializes this for the HVAC market will be financially set, as in "playboy mansion" financially set :)
Still skirting the IRB question -- someone, please?
I never even alluded to publishing under a made up name, so I don't know where that came from.
As for the "academic career": some people don't care, they have good industry jobs and do academia just for the fun of it. I know a couple of them, and whenever they publish something that comes out of their industrial research, they (rightly so) publish under their industrial affiliation. In academia they either teach or run research labs where grads do research, and their name gets tacked on at the end of the author list if they believe they've substantially contributed to the paper. Otherwise they have enough integrity not to. Perhaps that's a rare trait.
There's way too many people out there for everybody to "know" everybody else. If you have a brand new author, they can indicate whatever affiliation they wish and noone would know otherwise. Heck, even if you are working, say, at a University, and even are well known in your field, you're free to publish under a different affiliation if the research was not done in your capacity at the University. Many people who hold academic and industrial jobs publish like that. So, if you publish research done in affiliation with MegaCorp, who's tho enforce the IRB participation? You haven't answered the main question I had.