Factories don't work on internet time. Once a large expensive piece of industrial equipment is installed it's there for a loooong time. I used to work on upgrading some software for four machines that were 15 years old at the time. Two new machines were ordered (with a price tag of around 4M) and they wanted the control software to be compatible with the old machines. That was about a decade ago. The plan was not to upgrade until old control computers start failing. As far as I know they are still working.
Microsoft's idea seems much like DoubleRecall, except there's a twist where they hope they can filter bad responses well enough to get useful statistics from survey responses. DoubleRecall just makes you retype advertiser's words.
So with the Russians just starting on hypersonic engine design, looks to me like they are only 15 seconds behind the US:)
Or maybe not, according to wikipedia they were doing something 20+ years ago:
First working scramjet "GLL Holod" in world flies on 28 November 1991 reaching speed mach 5.8. However, the collapse of Soviet Union stopped the funding of the project.
After NASA's NASP program was cut, American scientists began to look at adopting available Russian technology as a less expensive alternative to developing hypersonic flight. On November 17, 1992, Russian scientists with some additional French support successfully launched a scramjet engine "Holod" in Kazakhstan6. From 1994 to 1998 NASA worked with the Russian Central Institute of Aviation Motors (CIAM) to test a dual-mode scramjet engine and transfer technology and experience to the West. Four tests took place, reaching Mach numbers of 5.5, 5.35, 5.8, and 6.5. The final test took place aboard a modified SA-5 surface to air missile launched from the Sary Shagan test range in the Republic of Kazakhstan on 12 February 1998. According to CIAM telemetry data, first ignition of the scramjet was unsuccessful, but after 10 seconds the engine was started and the experimental system flew 77s with good performance, up until the planned SA-5 missile self-destruction (according to NASA, no net thrust was achieved).
Some sources in the Russian military have said that a hypersonic (10-15M) maneuverable ICBM warhead was tested.
I used to work on license plate recognition about a decade ago. Typically there are problems with illumination, motion and noise. So what the systems try to do is boost illumination (often by hidden IR lights) and decrease motion related blur by taking multiple shots and integrating images and/or filtering the results. All this algorithms have some built in assumptions about the expected area of interest, scale and most likely motion. Suppose you detect license plate at some position and scale in frame N. To boost the probability of being correct, you want to check if you can find the same plate number in frame N+1 and possibly N+2. Detection is all about probability. There are some thresholds built in that on one side maximize the probability of license plate detection and on the other side minimize pollution of the database with bad results. So in short, if your license plate is dirty and your trajectory is not what the system expects (changing lanes and velocity) it's more likely the system will not store the result. If you know the specifics of the particular system, you may beat it easily, like if the system first looks for the plate frame, you can mask or offset the frame, or if you know about the exact illumination filtering procedure you may add some conflicting structured illumination.
If the reactor core had exploded there would be no way in hell for them to hide it. Impartial observers would exclude it by the fact that there were no radiation readings anywhere near intense enough to indicate that as a possibility.
Radiation readings were reported by the same company that took a year to finally admit triple meltdown, you can trust them if you want. Reactor blowing up does not necessarily mean a huge nuclear explosion. Going only a few percent overcritical for a fraction of a second can build up enough pressure to blow up. There's this educational video from a US experimental reactor showing what I'm talking about.
According to NRC transcripts there were fires in several fuel pools which were exposed to the atmosphere (the roofs were blown away by explosions). Many people believe the hydrogen was not enough to cause the mess at #3 so until the Japanese show the lid of #3 reactor an impartial observer cannot exclude the possibility of reactor itself blowing sky high.
I listened to a talk by someone doing materials research for the first wall. Apparently disruption of the plasma is not the big problem, what they are doing is optimizing the whole process of producing, running, cleaning and recycling the first wall tiles. They are testing different materials by bombarding them with neutrons, then they are trying to separate the nasty stuff and recycle what's useful.
Hang on, what about the angular resolution of visible light at 6m, with indents in surely being 0.1mm? Can we get high enough resolution Is that even possible? How fast must the picture be taken to avoid blurring?
The resolution is doable. There's a tradeoff between speed and noise. What you can do is take many pictures, align them and take a sum to get rid of some noise. If my memory serves me the noise will go down with the square root of the number of pictures. Or just pump up the light in say infrared spectrum, if you have 10 times illumination you can cut the exposition time to 1/10 and get about the same quality.
Note that the claimed total only includes iodine-131 and cesium-137, while they forget about radioactive noble gases and other isotopes. Besides, there are no public images where one could clearly see the cap of reactor 3. If reactor 3 or it's fuel pool has thrown significant amounts of plutonium in the air, the situation is much more dramatic than admitted.
Well in this particular case it was the Nazi government that was farsighted. The allies found giant presses when they occupied Germany at the end of WW2. So Germans had such presses running during WW2, and USA started heavy press program in 1950.
My telco offers IPTV box with a load of features but a really lousy interface. There's also a tablet app available that will show most of the channels but the interface is basically select one channel from a list and watch it. With so many people having tablets around it makes so much sense to integrate with TVs and make a tablet somewhat like a secondary screen and a much better remote. Apple has everything in place to make such a TV and a lot of space to innovate. Ipads and Iphones can become personal touch interfaces for the apps running on TV. I can think of dozens of functions that can be made easier and more intuitive with such a setup. Plus they can afford to use a higher-powered CPU/GPU in the TV making it more suitable for console-like software.
Even if there is an antisocial factor and the parents are to blame, it's not the kids fault and there are ways to help them without drugs.
It just so happens that I'm aware of a case of autism. My friend's kid was kept at home for the first 5 years with essentially no contact to any kids or any people outside the closer family circle. Sure enough she was diagnosed with a kind of autistic disorder in the kindergarten. They sought professional help and got it. If you look at the methods involved you will find there are surprisingly many things that you need to do counterintuitively with these children. Even if you know something about psychology you will be surprised at what works (talking to the animals...). Anyways, there were no drugs involved, the parents got instructed how to handle the kid in certain situations, the school teachers got a few instructions (and had to do some special handling during the first day of school) and in a few years the kid got to normal.
Linear quantization never made sense to me as far as encoding audio. Human ears, like our other senses, are logarithmic. The difference in linear intensity between two soft sounds is far more detectable than the same difference between two loud sounds. Linear quantization is thus wasteful in one end of the absolute intensity scale, and possibly insufficient in the other end. Why use an encoding so far from the optimal? Hardware considerations are not a good excuse because the same digital processing circuitry that the average delta-sigma DAC chip in every piece of consumer gear uses to convert the audio into a high bitrate/low bit depth stream before actual conversion to an analog signal can be trivially modified to handle nonlinearly quantized inputs.
Imagine a low frequency high amplitude sine wave added to a lower amplitude high frequency sine wave. There you have a reason to sample linearly if you want to preserve high frequency fidelity. Of course, you can then store the samples using a delta/logarithmic scheme like any ADPCM variant that have been used in wavetable synthesizers since like forever. However, any audio mixing/transcoding math involved will work best with raw linear data. So it makes sense to keep audio data linear when you process it and convert to something space saving only when you are storing or streaming.
Proponents of low-energy nuclear reaction research seem to believe Widom-Larsen Theory describes what might be going on in some of the so called "cold fusion" test devices like the one claimed by Rossi.
It shouldn't be too difficult to check the isotopes going in and out, and measure radiation (gamma, neutrons...) with sufficient accuracy to determine if there was any nuclear reaction and compute whether the result is above statistical noise. But I can't find any papers doing rigorous testing.
There is a huge opportunity for Microsoft to provide a tablet that could act either as an independent iPad like item or a thin-client (similar to the Wii U controller) that could act as an extension or detachable component of Xbox360 and Win8 applications.
Given the track record with previous Microsoft tablet efforts (I was playing with their transmeta containing tablet a long time ago) I'd say the problem is the software. The hardware is all there.
I have seen it coming. Nokia have been living in their comfortable telco-friendly niche for too long.
1. They have a ton of low-end models, each one seems to have different menus and a lot of missing features, as if telcos got to choose what features to remove so that they can try to sell a new phone contract every year.
2. Their middle-range models also lack in features and the quality does not always reflect the price. I paid 240 EUR and the side keys fell apart in one year.
3. Their high-end phones were basically show off pieces without a proper or at least not developed enough eco-system.
4. Their PC software has become a bit too bloated and it has some basic bugs (some MP3s not showing on the phone list, disk crawler locking up files...).
The combination of these drive many low-end users to experiment with other companies phones and most high-end users to try iPhone or Android.
...and it provokes serious questions about the ability to monitor exactly what's going on inside a reactor during a crisis. If you couldn't reliably tell that the reactor was actually in the process of melting down, then how can you react to the situation appropriately? It's like having faulty instrument readings while you're trying to safely land a plane with no visibility. The TEPCO crew could be the best reactor operators in the world, but if they don't know what is going on in there, they would be thoroughly borked.
The sad part of the story is that TEPCO crew apparently knew enough to figure out what was going on (whiteboard photos prove this), but officially they pretended they didn't know and simply omitted strongly suggestive datapoints from public releases. Only now, when enough isotopes have been blown around northern hemisphere that any interested scientist can sample the isotope ratio in the air and work back the numbers they slowly admit some truth, while still covering up what really exploded in reactor number 3.
I've implemented several RTMP servers for gaming, telcos and sideprojects (www.voicehall.com), and found a ton of border cases and a few undocumented features. Besides there are patents on some mechanisms of server implementation, but the ones I've found are not difficult to get around (at least I could get around them for our applications).
As far as transport is concerned, RTSP using a direct TCP connection is quite efficient with barely any slack, however RTSP over HTTP (say behind a firewall that only lets through HTTP requests) is quite nasty and not so efficient. It's not difficult to design a better protocol for streaming over HTTP, especially if you don't care about latency very much. A smart design would also name chunks in such a way that addressing the same (live or not live) streams by multiple clients could allow caching by HTTP proxies. The caching issue alone would be the big plus of a good HTTP streaming implementation, otherwise you can't do much better than RTSP over TCP.
Having actual experience with how lottery works behind the scenes I'd say this particular place was not run by people who knew what they were doing. You can't be so stupid to print something that is correlated to the outcome. This is something that would need statistical evaluation beforehand. Anyways, the way around it is to print independent serial numbers from a totally different random sequence or some strong crypto hash based on this other independent sequence. You can use these independent codes if your sales places are online so that a server can check ticket outcomes stored in a database. One would still want to test for proper stats before the series gets printed.
PC audio testers always forget to test for the influence of power supply on output noise. I noticed simply changing the power supply makes a big difference to the output noise level. Also some ventilators and other PC components draw current in bursts so there are nice clicks on transitions. This will affect both on-board sound and internal audio cards. I can tolerate a few decibels of white noise, but I don't like to feel like a doctor listening to PC internals. So I'd like to know how an audio component performs in worst case power supply scenario.
Would you feel secure if everybody could see and photograph your password? Then it's just a question how easy it is to make a replica that will fool the system.
Besides, I have heard from a major expert on the topic that there are many iris/retina conditions that make the system fail, meaning the system is unable to extract required features or unable to uniquely identify individual. In fact, there's no single biometric method that will work for all the people and uniquely identify them. You have to combine several features to get anywhere close to 100%.
I had tons of linux issues with Broadcom drivers and figured out both driver software and firmware were problematic. The Broadcom binary driver for my Broadcom chip version is not available, only the general linux driver, which nearly works. Now the tricky part is the firmware. Windows drivers update firmware on the fly whereas linux drivers don't. In fact, changes in firmware cause linux driver to work intermittently. Sometimes linux driver will fail to initialize connection due to some problem with firmware connecting to a particular switch, whereas windows driver has no such problem.
The key problem is firmware updates are not included in linux drivers due to legal reasons, it's not too difficult to reverse engineer that part from windows drivers.
So what Broadcom needs to do is to open source drivers and give permission to distribute firmware update code with open source drivers.
I've been dealing with Bayesian methods for a few years, too. I understand the goal of the hardware is not to run everything that is being sold as Bayesian methods. Basically Bayesian calculations mean computing conditional probabilities, which usually gets down to a ton of multiplications and additions. If the analog hardware can produce results for a particular subproblem with sufficient accuracy, then you are saving a lot of power and time. If it can produce estimates that are not entirely accurate but within sufficient bounds, then you can still avoid a whole lot of digital computations by narrowing down on possible solutions.
In the Cairo museum, next to the Tut's collection (it may be part of it, I'm not sure, I was there years ago), I saw a foldable bed frame with metallic hinges. I thought that was the technological high-point of the museum, I haven't seen anything like that from the same time frame anywhere in the world.
Slashdot Mirror
Factories don't work on internet time. Once a large expensive piece of industrial equipment is installed it's there for a loooong time. I used to work on upgrading some software for four machines that were 15 years old at the time. Two new machines were ordered (with a price tag of around 4M) and they wanted the control software to be compatible with the old machines. That was about a decade ago. The plan was not to upgrade until old control computers start failing. As far as I know they are still working.
Microsoft's idea seems much like DoubleRecall, except there's a twist where they hope they can filter bad responses well enough to get useful statistics from survey responses. DoubleRecall just makes you retype advertiser's words.
So with the Russians just starting on hypersonic engine design, looks to me like they are only 15 seconds behind the US :)
Or maybe not, according to wikipedia they were doing something 20+ years ago:
First working scramjet "GLL Holod" in world flies on 28 November 1991 reaching speed mach 5.8. However, the collapse of Soviet Union stopped the funding of the project.
After NASA's NASP program was cut, American scientists began to look at adopting available Russian technology as a less expensive alternative to developing hypersonic flight. On November 17, 1992, Russian scientists with some additional French support successfully launched a scramjet engine "Holod" in Kazakhstan6. From 1994 to 1998 NASA worked with the Russian Central Institute of Aviation Motors (CIAM) to test a dual-mode scramjet engine and transfer technology and experience to the West. Four tests took place, reaching Mach numbers of 5.5, 5.35, 5.8, and 6.5. The final test took place aboard a modified SA-5 surface to air missile launched from the Sary Shagan test range in the Republic of Kazakhstan on 12 February 1998. According to CIAM telemetry data, first ignition of the scramjet was unsuccessful, but after 10 seconds the engine was started and the experimental system flew 77s with good performance, up until the planned SA-5 missile self-destruction (according to NASA, no net thrust was achieved).
Some sources in the Russian military have said that a hypersonic (10-15M) maneuverable ICBM warhead was tested.
I used to work on license plate recognition about a decade ago. Typically there are problems with illumination, motion and noise. So what the systems try to do is boost illumination (often by hidden IR lights) and decrease motion related blur by taking multiple shots and integrating images and/or filtering the results. All this algorithms have some built in assumptions about the expected area of interest, scale and most likely motion. Suppose you detect license plate at some position and scale in frame N. To boost the probability of being correct, you want to check if you can find the same plate number in frame N+1 and possibly N+2. Detection is all about probability. There are some thresholds built in that on one side maximize the probability of license plate detection and on the other side minimize pollution of the database with bad results. So in short, if your license plate is dirty and your trajectory is not what the system expects (changing lanes and velocity) it's more likely the system will not store the result. If you know the specifics of the particular system, you may beat it easily, like if the system first looks for the plate frame, you can mask or offset the frame, or if you know about the exact illumination filtering procedure you may add some conflicting structured illumination.
If the reactor core had exploded there would be no way in hell for them to hide it. Impartial observers would exclude it by the fact that there were no radiation readings anywhere near intense enough to indicate that as a possibility.
Radiation readings were reported by the same company that took a year to finally admit triple meltdown, you can trust them if you want.
Reactor blowing up does not necessarily mean a huge nuclear explosion. Going only a few percent overcritical for a fraction of a second can build up enough pressure to blow up. There's this educational video from a US experimental reactor showing what I'm talking about.
According to NRC transcripts there were fires in several fuel pools which were exposed to the atmosphere (the roofs were blown away by explosions). Many people believe the hydrogen was not enough to cause the mess at #3 so until the Japanese show the lid of #3 reactor an impartial observer cannot exclude the possibility of reactor itself blowing sky high.
I listened to a talk by someone doing materials research for the first wall. Apparently disruption of the plasma is not the big problem, what they are doing is optimizing the whole process of producing, running, cleaning and recycling the first wall tiles. They are testing different materials by bombarding them with neutrons, then they are trying to separate the nasty stuff and recycle what's useful.
Hang on, what about the angular resolution of visible light at 6m, with indents in surely being 0.1mm? Can we get high enough resolution Is that even possible? How fast must the picture be taken to avoid blurring?
The resolution is doable. There's a tradeoff between speed and noise. What you can do is take many pictures, align them and take a sum to get rid of some noise. If my memory serves me the noise will go down with the square root of the number of pictures. Or just pump up the light in say infrared spectrum, if you have 10 times illumination you can cut the exposition time to 1/10 and get about the same quality.
Note that the claimed total only includes iodine-131 and cesium-137, while they forget about radioactive noble gases and other isotopes. Besides, there are no public images where one could clearly see the cap of reactor 3. If reactor 3 or it's fuel pool has thrown significant amounts of plutonium in the air, the situation is much more dramatic than admitted.
Well in this particular case it was the Nazi government that was farsighted. The allies found giant presses when they occupied Germany at the end of WW2. So Germans had such presses running during WW2, and USA started heavy press program in 1950.
My telco offers IPTV box with a load of features but a really lousy interface. There's also a tablet app available that will show most of the channels but the interface is basically select one channel from a list and watch it. With so many people having tablets around it makes so much sense to integrate with TVs and make a tablet somewhat like a secondary screen and a much better remote. Apple has everything in place to make such a TV and a lot of space to innovate. Ipads and Iphones can become personal touch interfaces for the apps running on TV. I can think of dozens of functions that can be made easier and more intuitive with such a setup. Plus they can afford to use a higher-powered CPU/GPU in the TV making it more suitable for console-like software.
Even if there is an antisocial factor and the parents are to blame, it's not the kids fault and there are ways to help them without drugs.
It just so happens that I'm aware of a case of autism. My friend's kid was kept at home for the first 5 years with essentially no contact to any kids or any people outside the closer family circle. Sure enough she was diagnosed with a kind of autistic disorder in the kindergarten. They sought professional help and got it. If you look at the methods involved you will find there are surprisingly many things that you need to do counterintuitively with these children. Even if you know something about psychology you will be surprised at what works (talking to the animals...). Anyways, there were no drugs involved, the parents got instructed how to handle the kid in certain situations, the school teachers got a few instructions (and had to do some special handling during the first day of school) and in a few years the kid got to normal.
Linear quantization never made sense to me as far as encoding audio. Human ears, like our other senses, are logarithmic. The difference in linear intensity between two soft sounds is far more detectable than the same difference between two loud sounds. Linear quantization is thus wasteful in one end of the absolute intensity scale, and possibly insufficient in the other end. Why use an encoding so far from the optimal? Hardware considerations are not a good excuse because the same digital processing circuitry that the average delta-sigma DAC chip in every piece of consumer gear uses to convert the audio into a high bitrate/low bit depth stream before actual conversion to an analog signal can be trivially modified to handle nonlinearly quantized inputs.
Imagine a low frequency high amplitude sine wave added to a lower amplitude high frequency sine wave. There you have a reason to sample linearly if you want to preserve high frequency fidelity. Of course, you can then store the samples using a delta/logarithmic scheme like any ADPCM variant that have been used in wavetable synthesizers since like forever. However, any audio mixing/transcoding math involved will work best with raw linear data. So it makes sense to keep audio data linear when you process it and convert to something space saving only when you are storing or streaming.
Proponents of low-energy nuclear reaction research seem to believe Widom-Larsen Theory describes what might be going on in some of the so called "cold fusion" test devices like the one claimed by Rossi.
It shouldn't be too difficult to check the isotopes going in and out, and measure radiation (gamma, neutrons...) with sufficient accuracy to determine if there was any nuclear reaction and compute whether the result is above statistical noise. But I can't find any papers doing rigorous testing.
There is a huge opportunity for Microsoft to provide a tablet that could act either as an independent iPad like item or a thin-client (similar to the Wii U controller) that could act as an extension or detachable component of Xbox360 and Win8 applications.
Given the track record with previous Microsoft tablet efforts (I was playing with their transmeta containing tablet a long time ago) I'd say the problem is the software. The hardware is all there.
I have seen it coming. Nokia have been living in their comfortable telco-friendly niche for too long.
1. They have a ton of low-end models, each one seems to have different menus and a lot of missing features, as if telcos got to choose what features to remove so that they can try to sell a new phone contract every year.
2. Their middle-range models also lack in features and the quality does not always reflect the price. I paid 240 EUR and the side keys fell apart in one year.
3. Their high-end phones were basically show off pieces without a proper or at least not developed enough eco-system.
4. Their PC software has become a bit too bloated and it has some basic bugs (some MP3s not showing on the phone list, disk crawler locking up files...).
The combination of these drive many low-end users to experiment with other companies phones and most high-end users to try iPhone or Android.
...and it provokes serious questions about the ability to monitor exactly what's going on inside a reactor during a crisis. If you couldn't reliably tell that the reactor was actually in the process of melting down, then how can you react to the situation appropriately? It's like having faulty instrument readings while you're trying to safely land a plane with no visibility. The TEPCO crew could be the best reactor operators in the world, but if they don't know what is going on in there, they would be thoroughly borked.
The sad part of the story is that TEPCO crew apparently knew enough to figure out what was going on (whiteboard photos prove this), but officially they pretended they didn't know and simply omitted strongly suggestive datapoints from public releases. Only now, when enough isotopes have been blown around northern hemisphere that any interested scientist can sample the isotope ratio in the air and work back the numbers they slowly admit some truth, while still covering up what really exploded in reactor number 3.
I've implemented several RTMP servers for gaming, telcos and sideprojects (www.voicehall.com), and found a ton of border cases and a few undocumented features. Besides there are patents on some mechanisms of server implementation, but the ones I've found are not difficult to get around (at least I could get around them for our applications).
As far as transport is concerned, RTSP using a direct TCP connection is quite efficient with barely any slack, however RTSP over HTTP (say behind a firewall that only lets through HTTP requests) is quite nasty and not so efficient. It's not difficult to design a better protocol for streaming over HTTP, especially if you don't care about latency very much. A smart design would also name chunks in such a way that addressing the same (live or not live) streams by multiple clients could allow caching by HTTP proxies. The caching issue alone would be the big plus of a good HTTP streaming implementation, otherwise you can't do much better than RTSP over TCP.
Having actual experience with how lottery works behind the scenes I'd say this particular place was not run by people who knew what they were doing. You can't be so stupid to print something that is correlated to the outcome. This is something that would need statistical evaluation beforehand. Anyways, the way around it is to print independent serial numbers from a totally different random sequence or some strong crypto hash based on this other independent sequence. You can use these independent codes if your sales places are online so that a server can check ticket outcomes stored in a database. One would still want to test for proper stats before the series gets printed.
PC audio testers always forget to test for the influence of power supply on output noise. I noticed simply changing the power supply makes a big difference to the output noise level. Also some ventilators and other PC components draw current in bursts so there are nice clicks on transitions. This will affect both on-board sound and internal audio cards. I can tolerate a few decibels of white noise, but I don't like to feel like a doctor listening to PC internals. So I'd like to know how an audio component performs in worst case power supply scenario.
Would you feel secure if everybody could see and photograph your password? Then it's just a question how easy it is to make a replica that will fool the system.
Besides, I have heard from a major expert on the topic that there are many iris/retina conditions that make the system fail, meaning the system is unable to extract required features or unable to uniquely identify individual. In fact, there's no single biometric method that will work for all the people and uniquely identify them. You have to combine several features to get anywhere close to 100%.
I had tons of linux issues with Broadcom drivers and figured out both driver software and firmware were problematic. The Broadcom binary driver for my Broadcom chip version is not available, only the general linux driver, which nearly works. Now the tricky part is the firmware. Windows drivers update firmware on the fly whereas linux drivers don't. In fact, changes in firmware cause linux driver to work intermittently. Sometimes linux driver will fail to initialize connection due to some problem with firmware connecting to a particular switch, whereas windows driver has no such problem.
The key problem is firmware updates are not included in linux drivers due to legal reasons, it's not too difficult to reverse engineer that part from windows drivers.
So what Broadcom needs to do is to open source drivers and give permission to distribute firmware update code with open source drivers.
I've been dealing with Bayesian methods for a few years, too. I understand the goal of the hardware is not to run everything that is being sold as Bayesian methods. Basically Bayesian calculations mean computing conditional probabilities, which usually gets down to a ton of multiplications and additions. If the analog hardware can produce results for a particular subproblem with sufficient accuracy, then you are saving a lot of power and time. If it can produce estimates that are not entirely accurate but within sufficient bounds, then you can still avoid a whole lot of digital computations by narrowing down on possible solutions.
In the Cairo museum, next to the Tut's collection (it may be part of it, I'm not sure, I was there years ago), I saw a foldable bed frame with metallic hinges. I thought that was the technological high-point of the museum, I haven't seen anything like that from the same time frame anywhere in the world.