To help content creation professionals manage their metadata and improve workflow efficiency, Sony has developed the Optical Disc Archive Content Manager, which is a software application (license) bundled with each drive.
You didn't look too hard at the ODA specs. For starters, everyone here is talking AT LEAST 100 megaBYTES per second of bandwidth on and off the media SUSTAINED.
Now look at Phony's ODA: 35-50 megaBITS per second--MAX (it is a disk, after all). Connection is USB-3. Target machines are winblows and mac, no mention of Linux or any kind of server environment at all.
Time to fill a full 1.5TB 12 disk cartridge: 48 hours (2 days) at 50 Mbps, 72 hours (3 days) at 35 Mbps.
For some place that's supposed to be for nerds who, unlike me, finished college, this discussion is embarrassing. Parent post and 1 or 2 other posts have it right, and this is something that every radio guy knows as well.
First, I have no affiliation with these people, but they sell worldwide and actually show pricing for real VSAT, not crappy HughesNet, Viasat, Starband, etc: http://www.groundcontrol.com/
Second, almost all satellite internet is from GEO orbit, as everyone has said, with massive latency; reducing contention is done with spot beams, but the catch is that, if you're not in the spot beam, you're out of luck: this is especially true of the new Ka-band services (Viasat-1, Gen-4 Hughesnet, and probably more coming). And since ALL of these are on Ku or Ka band, unless you can afford a big dish, you can expect rain fade much of the time.
Third, up until recently we had a Ku-band Hughesnet connection here at work for our extranet. It sucked. BIG TIME. I have to echo what everyone else says: do not get satellite internet unless you have NO OTHER CHOICE!
Last, there are the slow-speed alternatives: Inmarsat is also in GEO, but much slower and more expensive; in exchange, you get portability (no dish, just one of those suitcase antennas). Then there's Iridium (2400 bps) and Global(aka Local)Star (9600 bps--no kilo!), which are only useful for e-mail without attachments or text browsing with Lynx (and even then it'll be slow): these are in LEO (Low Earth Orbit), but at these speeds from the 1980's, you won't notice the latency gain.:(
Certification from the relevant national authority is absolutely required for *ANYTHING* capable of transmitting RF. For something that connects to a public network, there are additional certifications besides just the basic RF ones. I still remember back in the old days, if you took your AMPS handset into Canada, you had to have it registered at Canadian customs; this was eventually dropped, but I don't know if it was due to complaints, drowning in workload, or what.
However, I disagree about FOSS firmware based on the very existance of all the 802.11 and Bluetooth drivers in our favorite operating systems: this was a real concern for them, but the wrath of the world's governments has not come down on them since, for example, MadWiFi was open-sourced. Cellular Radiotelephone networks present a special case, not because of the RF, but due to the authentication requirements to prevent toll fraud. Besides this, individual network operators also check out devices to be sure they behave on their networks before they commit to carrying them (for GSM).
One last thing, though: at least here in the USA, much of our GSM will disappear in 2016 when AT&T shuts down that network; T-Mobile USA has not given a date yet. Unfortunately, WCDMA--much less LTE in its various forms--is heavily patented worldwide, so getting a legal FOSS implementation of it is probably impossible at this time, so certs would be the least of your trouble: do you really want the likes of Qualcomm suing you into oblivion?
Remember what happened to it: instead of upgrading it to provide near-GNSS accuracy, they killed it, eliminating the only terrestrial nav/pos system outside of major airports and air traffic lanes. If we have another Carrington-size solar event or someone decides to deploy their satellite-killer missles/satellites/sharks-with-lasers/whatever, WE HAVE NO SAFETY NET for nav/pos as well as network synchronization!
They've already proven once they're willing to sacrifice the country's safety against outside forces (while simultaneously building up their off-, er, defensive capabilities against their own citizenry), so what makes you think they won't do it again?
Mod parent up: I searched for almost 15 minutes trying to find the exact "free software" license it was changed to, and failed. But, boy, finding how to use XenControl (which runs on winblows only, BTW) to "license" your server (apparently that's what Citrix calls a support contract now) is very easy; oh, and this "license" is per socket now rather than per machine.
My take away from reading this and the blog post is that, while NVIDIA may consider graphics to be their bread & butter, it looks like they're looking at this space (HPC) very seriously in the long term--perhaps they even think they can dominate it. This is a big difference from the other players: IBM isn't bothering to throw POWER at it, and AMD/ATI is only present on older machines; ATI in particular seems more interested in going after the mobile space rather than HPC. I don't know what to make of Intel other than they know they're the choice for the non-GPU side and are at the top of their game.
One problem I see is that NVIDIA is still a fabless house and has performance limitations tied to whatever fab they partner with; perhaps this is why they downplay process gains in the blog post.
Of course, if the conspiracy theorists are to be believed, NSA and friends already have this 10-years-into-the-future technology...
1. The Evil Empire: no matter how much money Gates & Co give away, I never forget where (and, more importantly, how) he got it in the first place. Also, how they continue to compete with Apple and Oracle for the title of Most Evil (Tech) Company. (Almost forgot about Monsanto there...)
2. FOSS is far more secure, especially from spyware and such. I don't access my bank account, for example, from anywhere other than my computer sporting Slackware that I know personally to be clean.
3. It also follows the Golden Rules: "treat others as you want to be treated" and "share and share alike".
4. I can afford it!
Why I must use winblows at times:
1. Certain proprietary software that will not run on anything but winblows, usually because of DRM, but occasionally due to lack of a driver in Linux/BSD. For me personally this is some games or my radio programming software (http://www.rtsystemsinc.com which is surprisingly DRM'd to the point Wine/Crossover won't run it--and the author has stated to me over the phone that he doesn't care about anything other than windows).
2. The company that I, er, the franchise I work for, works for, decided to become a M$ $hop, forcing us to use their proprietary software that breaks all the time and runs as an Active-X app! Curious thing, though: I'm convinced, now, that the backend may be an IBM CICS system. Weird.
3. Trying to teach my non-tech family (particularly my technophobic parents--my dad STILL doesn't have an ATM card!) is an exercise in futility. Only a few years ago did he finally get a laptop because he has to do certain transactions (some commercial taxes, etc) online. I just broke down, let them use winblows, and hope for the best--they never listen to me anyway.
Claimer: I proudly own these "Mashed Potatoes" and "Vegetarian" shirts and people take pictures of us all the time--99%+ of people love them and they're the BEST ice-breakers! (No joke)
"...a former top executive at software maker SAP..."
I really think this says it all: it would be like having an IBM exec trying to run Google when it was a startup--you don't put curmugeons in charge of something this new (IMHO).
As I understand it, Intel still has the advantage in the performance per watt category for general processing and GPUs have better performance per watt IF you can optimize for that specific environment--both things which have been commented to death endlessly by people far more knowledgeable than I.
However, to me there are at least 3 questions unanswered:
1. ASICs (and possibly FPGAs): Bitcoin miners and DES breakers are the best known examples. Where is the dividing line between where your operations are specific enough to emply an ASIC vs not specific enough and needing a GPU (or even CPU)? Could further optimization move this line more toward the ASIC?
2. Huge dies: This has been talked about before, but it seems that, for applications that are embarrassingly parallel, this is clearly where the next revolution will be, with hundreds of cores (at least, and of whatever kind of "core" you want). So when will this stop being vaporware?
3. But what do we do about all the NON-parallel jobs? If you can't apply an ASIC and you can't break it down, you're still stuck at the basic wall we've been at for around a decade now: where's Moore's (performance) law here? It would seem the only hope is new algorithms: TRUE computer science!
Mod parent up: the story here is the extreme miniaturization taking place, where separate units or even a rack full of equipment can now be made into a single chip the size of an existing GPS/GLONASS receiver by itself!
But wait, there's more: remember the the atomic clock on a chip that DARPA wanted? I think we now know what they really wanted it for, as you can't implement this kind of indoor inertial navigation (with errors in inches/centimeters) without one.
Oh, and for you tin-hat folks, here's another: with this, you can now have your movements tracked INDOORS as well as out simply by sewing one of these in as a fake button, between seams, etcetera: this is the final ingredient in 100% ubiquious surveillance that until now has not been possible. Are you scared yet?
I refuse to have a cell phone because they are tracking and surveillance devices. They all enable the phone system to record where the user goes, and many (perhaps all) can be remotely converted into listening devices.
In addition, most of them are computers with nonfree software installed. Even if they don't allow the user to replace the software, someone else can replace it remotely. Since the software can be changed, we cannot regard it as equivalent to a circuit. A machine that allows installation of software is a computer, and computers should run free software.
When I need to call someone, I ask someone nearby to let me make a call.
As a ham radio operator myself, reading some on GSM and other standards, a little on OpenBTS, and what the military (especially black ops like CIA) have done in these kinds of situations, I think I can reliably state this:
1. *ANY* radio transmission can be tracked to its source. If your phone on, it can be triangulated automagically by the base stations around you, although modern E-911 compliant ones also assist in this. In addition, the TIMING can be used to trace your distance from even one cell site (think latency/ping), so you can get a radius (similar to GPS, if I've read right).
2. The only way not to be tracked in this fashion is to turn off all radio transmitters on your person or nearby that can be associated with you. This includes wifi and can even include bluetooth in radio-quiet locations. Bear in mind you can fingerprint individual transmitters, to the point there are commercial transmitter fingerprint readers readily available: these are usually used when dealing with jammers, but you can track anyone with these.
3. None of this precludes them putting an active tracking device in your phone (I've read the battery can be replaced with a smaller one with a device included), your car, jacket, etc. These were being done during the cold war; the only difference is that you can buy them online now! And don't even get started on passive methods like lasers-on-the-windows, Van Eck, etc.
4. Jamming just keeps you from making calls: your radio can't hear the base. The base can still hear you just fine (under normal circumstances).
The bottom line: you'd have to do like RMS does and not carry one...though I wonder how useful that is since his entourage probably are loaded with them!
Unlike most of you, it would seem, I did RTFS, along with the links from it to more stories: it seems that Massachussetts is just one state/location that is doing this sort of thing, along with NY, TX, UT, and Chicago.
Bottom line: they tax software, software-as-a-service (SaaS, a new acronym to me), internet access, hosting, etc; this is just another item to add to the list, in their eyes. At first, I was going to say, "Another reason to use Free Software," but then the enormity of the truth crushed me back into depression: another thing I can't un-see (or un-learn, more like it).
The previous owner of the motel I work at got ripped off by a company that installed one of these 16 camera systems. The cameras never work right, and I knew something funny was was with the DVR when it said that you need IE and Active-X to watch it!
My current boss occasionally asks me to connect it up like the system his uncle (his boss) has, and I keep blowing him off, not because it would be hard, but because I'd both have to open a hole in the firewall to the outside world AND it would be fully accessible to anyone on the motel wi-fi system.
Erm...full disclosure, I worked in casinos, and also don't feel like being constantly under surveillance, either...
I have to disagree with you: I have yet to see any real Sinophobia, at least here in America--hell, Chinese (nearly slave) labor helped build the West! Rather, the phobia is of jobs being lost to cheap labor overseas, of which China is just the biggest one (for now), and that will start changing if robotics start taking off (watch the Twilight Zone episode The Brain Center at Whipple's to see how far back this fear goes).
Truthfully, there is only one real fear of China by the West: that they want to become the world's new superpower, replacing the old Soviet Union. Once they accomplish this, with their combined capitalist/(communist/fascist) hybrid, they can bring serious political pressure on the entire world without having to fire a shot. This could also push Chinese into becoming a mainstream language outside China, causing all sorts of problems such as being a strong tonal language (most Western languages are not) and the historic poor compatibility with computers.
I still stand by what I was going to say: I'm embarrassed at my government and it seems that, no matter who you elect, they go do what they want. I'm sure this isn't news to any of you (or me) , but as an American, I'm just really sick and tired of it.
That said, it occurs to me--and not to any of you, surprisingly--that these multi-national, world-wide corporations may be based here in the USA, but they could be located anywhere, and typically have offices everywhere at that. With the exception of defense contractors, any of these companies could move anywhere in the world they wished, if they so chose. They don't for a reason: because the laws here favor these corporations over just about everything else--in this particular case, privacy laws. (Or should we say, lack thereof?)
Despite all its problems, Europe is rich and these corporations know it. Companies that depend on advertising like Google need some privacy taken away in order for their pricier targeted ads to function. (Note: I am *NOT* advocating any of this!) And then there's Facebook, who's whole business model revolves around stripping your privacy away. For what ever reason, they can't buy off these European politicians, so they're doing the next best thing and using the ones they already bought off here. This isn't really news as corporations here do this all the time: witness ADM and the sugar tariff, for example. The news is that they're being so public about it and the backlash is growing.
Personally, I hope the backlash makes its way here, but so far it has been very muted.
I was a slot mechanic in the mid-late 90's in Nevada. Much of what was written in the parent message is new to me, but matches what we were doing back then with older tech. One thing to remember about selling a gaming machine in Nevada: the saying is, "If you can pass inspection in Nevada, you can pass anywhere." Nevada's Gaming requirements are simply the toughest in the world, and are why many machine manufacturers you might see at Indian casinos are not found in Nevada, and conversely why those that do almost always have an office there.
In the two casinos I worked for, we would keep "master" ROMs along with a dual-slot programmer in the vault. During inspections by the Nevada Gaming Commission (NGC), every time during large jackpots, or if a machine was paying out too much (percentage was too high), we would turn off the machine, open up mobo box (which was lockable, though this was only done at the casinos I worked at for Megabucks--this was an IGT and NGC requirement, and the only non-cash locks we didn't have keys for on the floor), pull the ROM out of the machine and do a direct compare to the master via the programmer--no PC needed. The master ROMs themselves could be compared to a master ROM that the manufacturer and NGC had; both also had the source code, as manufacturers have to give the source to NGC (but not the casinos).
We got some newer machines later that didn't run on 8051's: Bally Game Makers were relatively new at the time I was working my first casinos, and VLC and Williams were just getting into it by the time I left; Odyssey came out in between, which was the first (AFAIK) platform based on a PC. With the former machines, if I remember right, we just checked CRC's printed on a screen. I'm sure there was a better way, but if there was, I don't remember it; with the Odyssey, I never knew what you would verify it with: I'm assuming comparing one drive to another since it didn't have a CD-ROM and was pre-USB and such. It really didn't matter because, despite being so over priced (IMHO), they were never connected to any progressives and only had standard jackpots (under the $1,200 IRS-reporting limit, if I remember correctly).
WRT the cash machine problem, the issue is not whether you can open-source the software, but that the binaries are unaltered that are running on the machine. Most of you here on/. deal with this every day, and the method of simply running a hash on the ROM and comparing it to the "accepted" compile of the open software is all you need to prove it hasn't been tampered with. Sure, it can be replaced, but if the inspections are by surprise, they won't have time; alternately, you can do what they do with CB's here in the US and pot the shit out of the ROM--at that point, an inspection need not be more than visual.
1. There is non-browser-related software that runs on Java. The software for my cheapo vector network analyzer is written in Java, for instance. Then you have other things, even system software such as Dalvik. Thus, even if we can make it go away in the browser, we can't everywhere else.
2. That brings up your point: my software didn't bring its own JRE. However, it turns out it runs just fine on OpenJRE. MY question: is OpenJDK/JRE vulnerable to this exploit? Is Dalvik? Or is this an inherent vulnerability to the language or interpreter (no matter who writes it) itself? (I hope that makes sense...)
There are more anecdotes, suspicions, etc about this same thing going on each and every day ever since there has been a press, but it's extremely rare for this kind of industry self-censorship to be this blatent and in-your-face.
This could just be a moronic decision by idiots at CBS without thinking of the consequences...or maybe, just maybe, THEY NO LONGER *CARE* ABOUT ANY CONSEQUENCES...
This is a question I've wondered for years and have never seen answered: why can't chemical thrusters used on satellites (particularly in geostationary orbit) be replaced with ion ones? It seems to me that running out of fuel is the primary method of "death" for a geostationary satellite. Do station-keeping maneuvers really require that much thrust?
That isn't a fix, but merely flimsy cork or finger in the hole. Unfortunately, from what I read (Samsung's version of/dev/mem but with global access), this "hole" is more proverbially along the lines of this bad boy:
In other words, its a hardware design flaw so big it can only be worked around, and even then only poorly.
I'm doubly pissed here because I bought the T-Mobile USA version of the Galaxy Note II (SGH-T889) on the day it came out, and a month before this broke. Luckily, I make a point of not doing financial transactions on it, but what about the other 5M+ GN2 owners as well as international GS3 owners (CAN/AM GS3 uses Snapdragon and is supposedly unaffected...).
Slashdot Mirror
Replying to myself: as if the drive prices weren't expensive enough, the prices for media are totally, well, consistent with Sony:
1.2TB rewritable $270 from B&H Photo: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1010742-REG/sony_odc1200re_archive_cartridge_1_2tb_rewritable.html
1.5TB WORM $280 from B&H Photo: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/983354-REG/sony_odc1500r_archive_cartridge_1500gb_write.html
And to top it all off, here's the obligatory DRM:
To help content creation professionals manage their metadata and improve workflow efficiency, Sony has developed the Optical Disc Archive Content Manager, which is a software application (license) bundled with each drive.
You didn't look too hard at the ODA specs. For starters, everyone here is talking AT LEAST 100 megaBYTES per second of bandwidth on and off the media SUSTAINED.
Now look at Phony's ODA: 35-50 megaBITS per second--MAX (it is a disk, after all). Connection is USB-3. Target machines are winblows and mac, no mention of Linux or any kind of server environment at all.
Time to fill a full 1.5TB 12 disk cartridge: 48 hours (2 days) at 50 Mbps, 72 hours (3 days) at 35 Mbps.
It was a joke when it was introduced, and an even bigger joke now: http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/12/04/16/1924248/30-blu-ray-discs-in-a-15tb-minidisc-like-cassette
Not funny enough? Here is more hilarity (the prices): http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/cat-datastorage/cat-opticaldiscarchive/
For some place that's supposed to be for nerds who, unlike me, finished college, this discussion is embarrassing. Parent post and 1 or 2 other posts have it right, and this is something that every radio guy knows as well.
Wikipedia references: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velocity_factor
More general discussion with heavy math: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_velocity
The reason for it all: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refractive_index
This is straight from the horse's mouth: http://www.corning.com/WorkArea/downloadasset.aspx?id=39403
First, I have no affiliation with these people, but they sell worldwide and actually show pricing for real VSAT, not crappy HughesNet, Viasat, Starband, etc: http://www.groundcontrol.com/
Second, almost all satellite internet is from GEO orbit, as everyone has said, with massive latency; reducing contention is done with spot beams, but the catch is that, if you're not in the spot beam, you're out of luck: this is especially true of the new Ka-band services (Viasat-1, Gen-4 Hughesnet, and probably more coming). And since ALL of these are on Ku or Ka band, unless you can afford a big dish, you can expect rain fade much of the time.
Third, up until recently we had a Ku-band Hughesnet connection here at work for our extranet. It sucked. BIG TIME. I have to echo what everyone else says: do not get satellite internet unless you have NO OTHER CHOICE!
Last, there are the slow-speed alternatives: Inmarsat is also in GEO, but much slower and more expensive; in exchange, you get portability (no dish, just one of those suitcase antennas). Then there's Iridium (2400 bps) and Global(aka Local)Star (9600 bps--no kilo!), which are only useful for e-mail without attachments or text browsing with Lynx (and even then it'll be slow): these are in LEO (Low Earth Orbit), but at these speeds from the 1980's, you won't notice the latency gain. :(
Hope this helps, Mike
Certification from the relevant national authority is absolutely required for *ANYTHING* capable of transmitting RF. For something that connects to a public network, there are additional certifications besides just the basic RF ones. I still remember back in the old days, if you took your AMPS handset into Canada, you had to have it registered at Canadian customs; this was eventually dropped, but I don't know if it was due to complaints, drowning in workload, or what.
However, I disagree about FOSS firmware based on the very existance of all the 802.11 and Bluetooth drivers in our favorite operating systems: this was a real concern for them, but the wrath of the world's governments has not come down on them since, for example, MadWiFi was open-sourced. Cellular Radiotelephone networks present a special case, not because of the RF, but due to the authentication requirements to prevent toll fraud.
Besides this, individual network operators also check out devices to be sure they behave on their networks before they commit to carrying them (for GSM).
One last thing, though: at least here in the USA, much of our GSM will disappear in 2016 when AT&T shuts down that network; T-Mobile USA has not given a date yet. Unfortunately, WCDMA--much less LTE in its various forms--is heavily patented worldwide, so getting a legal FOSS implementation of it is probably impossible at this time, so certs would be the least of your trouble: do you really want the likes of Qualcomm suing you into oblivion?
Remember what happened to it: instead of upgrading it to provide near-GNSS accuracy, they killed it, eliminating the only terrestrial nav/pos system outside of major airports and air traffic lanes. If we have another Carrington-size solar event or someone decides to deploy their satellite-killer missles/satellites/sharks-with-lasers/whatever, WE HAVE NO SAFETY NET for nav/pos as well as network synchronization!
They've already proven once they're willing to sacrifice the country's safety against outside forces (while simultaneously building up their off-, er, defensive capabilities against their own citizenry), so what makes you think they won't do it again?
Mod parent up: I searched for almost 15 minutes trying to find the exact "free software" license it was changed to, and failed. But, boy, finding how to use XenControl (which runs on winblows only, BTW) to "license" your server (apparently that's what Citrix calls a support contract now) is very easy; oh, and this "license" is per socket now rather than per machine.
My take away from reading this and the blog post is that, while NVIDIA may consider graphics to be their bread & butter, it looks like they're looking at this space (HPC) very seriously in the long term--perhaps they even think they can dominate it. This is a big difference from the other players: IBM isn't bothering to throw POWER at it, and AMD/ATI is only present on older machines; ATI in particular seems more interested in going after the mobile space rather than HPC. I don't know what to make of Intel other than they know they're the choice for the non-GPU side and are at the top of their game.
One problem I see is that NVIDIA is still a fabless house and has performance limitations tied to whatever fab they partner with; perhaps this is why they downplay process gains in the blog post.
Of course, if the conspiracy theorists are to be believed, NSA and friends already have this 10-years-into-the-future technology...
Why I stay off windows whenever possible:
1. The Evil Empire: no matter how much money Gates & Co give away, I never forget where (and, more importantly, how) he got it in the first place. Also, how they continue to compete with Apple and Oracle for the title of Most Evil (Tech) Company. (Almost forgot about Monsanto there...)
2. FOSS is far more secure, especially from spyware and such. I don't access my bank account, for example, from anywhere other than my computer sporting Slackware that I know personally to be clean.
3. It also follows the Golden Rules: "treat others as you want to be treated" and "share and share alike".
4. I can afford it!
Why I must use winblows at times:
1. Certain proprietary software that will not run on anything but winblows, usually because of DRM, but occasionally due to lack of a driver in Linux/BSD. For me personally this is some games or my radio programming software (http://www.rtsystemsinc.com which is surprisingly DRM'd to the point Wine/Crossover won't run it--and the author has stated to me over the phone that he doesn't care about anything other than windows).
2. The company that I, er, the franchise I work for, works for, decided to become a M$ $hop, forcing us to use their proprietary software that breaks all the time and runs as an Active-X app! Curious thing, though: I'm convinced, now, that the backend may be an IBM CICS system. Weird.
3. Trying to teach my non-tech family (particularly my technophobic parents--my dad STILL doesn't have an ATM card!) is an exercise in futility. Only a few years ago did he finally get a laptop because he has to do certain transactions (some commercial taxes, etc) online. I just broke down, let them use winblows, and hope for the best--they never listen to me anyway.
People for the Eating of Tasty Animals--BEHOLD!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dullhunk/358317592
and
http://www.amatteroftasteinc.com/peta.html
Claimer: I proudly own these "Mashed Potatoes" and "Vegetarian" shirts and people take pictures of us all the time--99%+ of people love them and they're the BEST ice-breakers! (No joke)
"...a former top executive at software maker SAP..."
I really think this says it all: it would be like having an IBM exec trying to run Google when it was a startup--you don't put curmugeons in charge of something this new (IMHO).
As I understand it, Intel still has the advantage in the performance per watt category for general processing and GPUs have better performance per watt IF you can optimize for that specific environment--both things which have been commented to death endlessly by people far more knowledgeable than I.
However, to me there are at least 3 questions unanswered:
1. ASICs (and possibly FPGAs): Bitcoin miners and DES breakers are the best known examples. Where is the dividing line between where your operations are specific enough to emply an ASIC vs not specific enough and needing a GPU (or even CPU)? Could further optimization move this line more toward the ASIC?
2. Huge dies: This has been talked about before, but it seems that, for applications that are embarrassingly parallel, this is clearly where the next revolution will be, with hundreds of cores (at least, and of whatever kind of "core" you want). So when will this stop being vaporware?
3. But what do we do about all the NON-parallel jobs? If you can't apply an ASIC and you can't break it down, you're still stuck at the basic wall we've been at for around a decade now: where's Moore's (performance) law here? It would seem the only hope is new algorithms: TRUE computer science!
Mod parent up: the story here is the extreme miniaturization taking place, where separate units or even a rack full of equipment can now be made into a single chip the size of an existing GPS/GLONASS receiver by itself!
But wait, there's more: remember the the atomic clock on a chip that DARPA wanted? I think we now know what they really wanted it for, as you can't implement this kind of indoor inertial navigation (with errors in inches/centimeters) without one.
Oh, and for you tin-hat folks, here's another: with this, you can now have your movements tracked INDOORS as well as out simply by sewing one of these in as a fake button, between seams, etcetera: this is the final ingredient in 100% ubiquious surveillance that until now has not been possible. Are you scared yet?
This is a complete quote from the relevant section of http://stallman.org/rms-lifestyle.html
Cellular Phones
I refuse to have a cell phone because they are tracking and surveillance devices. They all enable the phone system to record where the user goes, and many (perhaps all) can be remotely converted into listening devices.
In addition, most of them are computers with nonfree software installed. Even if they don't allow the user to replace the software, someone else can replace it remotely. Since the software can be changed, we cannot regard it as equivalent to a circuit. A machine that allows installation of software is a computer, and computers should run free software.
When I need to call someone, I ask someone nearby to let me make a call.
As a ham radio operator myself, reading some on GSM and other standards, a little on OpenBTS, and what the military (especially black ops like CIA) have done in these kinds of situations, I think I can reliably state this:
1. *ANY* radio transmission can be tracked to its source. If your phone on, it can be triangulated automagically by the base stations around you, although modern E-911 compliant ones also assist in this. In addition, the TIMING can be used to trace your distance from even one cell site (think latency/ping), so you can get a radius (similar to GPS, if I've read right).
2. The only way not to be tracked in this fashion is to turn off all radio transmitters on your person or nearby that can be associated with you. This includes wifi and can even include bluetooth in radio-quiet locations. Bear in mind you can fingerprint individual transmitters, to the point there are commercial transmitter fingerprint readers readily available: these are usually used when dealing with jammers, but you can track anyone with these.
3. None of this precludes them putting an active tracking device in your phone (I've read the battery can be replaced with a smaller one with a device included), your car, jacket, etc. These were being done during the cold war; the only difference is that you can buy them online now! And don't even get started on passive methods like lasers-on-the-windows, Van Eck, etc.
4. Jamming just keeps you from making calls: your radio can't hear the base. The base can still hear you just fine (under normal circumstances).
The bottom line: you'd have to do like RMS does and not carry one...though I wonder how useful that is since his entourage probably are loaded with them!
Unlike most of you, it would seem, I did RTFS, along with the links from it to more stories: it seems that Massachussetts is just one state/location that is doing this sort of thing, along with NY, TX, UT, and Chicago.
Bottom line: they tax software, software-as-a-service (SaaS, a new acronym to me), internet access, hosting, etc; this is just another item to add to the list, in their eyes. At first, I was going to say, "Another reason to use Free Software," but then the enormity of the truth crushed me back into depression: another thing I can't un-see (or un-learn, more like it).
The previous owner of the motel I work at got ripped off by a company that installed one of these 16 camera systems. The cameras never work right, and I knew something funny was was with the DVR when it said that you need IE and Active-X to watch it!
My current boss occasionally asks me to connect it up like the system his uncle (his boss) has, and I keep blowing him off, not because it would be hard, but because I'd both have to open a hole in the firewall to the outside world AND it would be fully accessible to anyone on the motel wi-fi system.
Erm...full disclosure, I worked in casinos, and also don't feel like being constantly under surveillance, either...
I have to disagree with you: I have yet to see any real Sinophobia, at least here in America--hell, Chinese (nearly slave) labor helped build the West! Rather, the phobia is of jobs being lost to cheap labor overseas, of which China is just the biggest one (for now), and that will start changing if robotics start taking off (watch the Twilight Zone episode The Brain Center at Whipple's to see how far back this fear goes).
Truthfully, there is only one real fear of China by the West: that they want to become the world's new superpower, replacing the old Soviet Union. Once they accomplish this, with their combined capitalist/(communist/fascist) hybrid, they can bring serious political pressure on the entire world without having to fire a shot. This could also push Chinese into becoming a mainstream language outside China, causing all sorts of problems such as being a strong tonal language (most Western languages are not) and the historic poor compatibility with computers.
I still stand by what I was going to say: I'm embarrassed at my government and it seems that, no matter who you elect, they go do what they want. I'm sure this isn't news to any of you (or me) , but as an American, I'm just really sick and tired of it.
That said, it occurs to me--and not to any of you, surprisingly--that these multi-national, world-wide corporations may be based here in the USA, but they could be located anywhere, and typically have offices everywhere at that. With the exception of defense contractors, any of these companies could move anywhere in the world they wished, if they so chose. They don't for a reason: because the laws here favor these corporations over just about everything else--in this particular case, privacy laws. (Or should we say, lack thereof?)
Despite all its problems, Europe is rich and these corporations know it. Companies that depend on advertising like Google need some privacy taken away in order for their pricier targeted ads to function. (Note: I am *NOT* advocating any of this!) And then there's Facebook, who's whole business model revolves around stripping your privacy away. For what ever reason, they can't buy off these European politicians, so they're doing the next best thing and using the ones they already bought off here. This isn't really news as corporations here do this all the time: witness ADM and the sugar tariff, for example. The news is that they're being so public about it and the backlash is growing.
Personally, I hope the backlash makes its way here, but so far it has been very muted.
...so become Mr. Hyde!
I was a slot mechanic in the mid-late 90's in Nevada. Much of what was written in the parent message is new to me, but matches what we were doing back then with older tech. One thing to remember about selling a gaming machine in Nevada: the saying is, "If you can pass inspection in Nevada, you can pass anywhere." Nevada's Gaming requirements are simply the toughest in the world, and are why many machine manufacturers you might see at Indian casinos are not found in Nevada, and conversely why those that do almost always have an office there.
In the two casinos I worked for, we would keep "master" ROMs along with a dual-slot programmer in the vault. During inspections by the Nevada Gaming Commission (NGC), every time during large jackpots, or if a machine was paying out too much (percentage was too high), we would turn off the machine, open up mobo box (which was lockable, though this was only done at the casinos I worked at for Megabucks--this was an IGT and NGC requirement, and the only non-cash locks we didn't have keys for on the floor), pull the ROM out of the machine and do a direct compare to the master via the programmer--no PC needed. The master ROMs themselves could be compared to a master ROM that the manufacturer and NGC had; both also had the source code, as manufacturers have to give the source to NGC (but not the casinos).
We got some newer machines later that didn't run on 8051's: Bally Game Makers were relatively new at the time I was working my first casinos, and VLC and Williams were just getting into it by the time I left; Odyssey came out in between, which was the first (AFAIK) platform based on a PC. With the former machines, if I remember right, we just checked CRC's printed on a screen. I'm sure there was a better way, but if there was, I don't remember it; with the Odyssey, I never knew what you would verify it with: I'm assuming comparing one drive to another since it didn't have a CD-ROM and was pre-USB and such. It really didn't matter because, despite being so over priced (IMHO), they were never connected to any progressives and only had standard jackpots (under the $1,200 IRS-reporting limit, if I remember correctly).
WRT the cash machine problem, the issue is not whether you can open-source the software, but that the binaries are unaltered that are running on the machine. Most of you here on /. deal with this every day, and the method of simply running a hash on the ROM and comparing it to the "accepted" compile of the open software is all you need to prove it hasn't been tampered with. Sure, it can be replaced, but if the inspections are by surprise, they won't have time; alternately, you can do what they do with CB's here in the US and pot the shit out of the ROM--at that point, an inspection need not be more than visual.
You kind of brought up my topic:
1. There is non-browser-related software that runs on Java. The software for my cheapo vector network analyzer is written in Java, for instance. Then you have other things, even system software such as Dalvik. Thus, even if we can make it go away in the browser, we can't everywhere else.
2. That brings up your point: my software didn't bring its own JRE. However, it turns out it runs just fine on OpenJRE. MY question: is OpenJDK/JRE vulnerable to this exploit? Is Dalvik? Or is this an inherent vulnerability to the language or interpreter (no matter who writes it) itself? (I hope that makes sense...)
There are more anecdotes, suspicions, etc about this same thing going on each and every day ever since there has been a press, but it's extremely rare for this kind of industry self-censorship to be this blatent and in-your-face.
This could just be a moronic decision by idiots at CBS without thinking of the consequences...or maybe, just maybe, THEY NO LONGER *CARE* ABOUT ANY CONSEQUENCES...
Just a hunch...
The only game worth waiting for this year! :P
This is a question I've wondered for years and have never seen answered: why can't chemical thrusters used on satellites (particularly in geostationary orbit) be replaced with ion ones? It seems to me that running out of fuel is the primary method of "death" for a geostationary satellite. Do station-keeping maneuvers really require that much thrust?
That isn't a fix, but merely flimsy cork or finger in the hole. Unfortunately, from what I read (Samsung's version of /dev/mem but with global access), this "hole" is more proverbially along the lines of this bad boy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bingham_Canyon_Mine
In other words, its a hardware design flaw so big it can only be worked around, and even then only poorly.
I'm doubly pissed here because I bought the T-Mobile USA version of the Galaxy Note II (SGH-T889) on the day it came out, and a month before this broke. Luckily, I make a point of not doing financial transactions on it, but what about the other 5M+ GN2 owners as well as international GS3 owners (CAN/AM GS3 uses Snapdragon and is supposedly unaffected...).