at the 300 meter resolution cited in the story I wouldn't worry too much - they won't be reading any license plates...and unless you live in a REALLY big house, that won't show up in more than one pixel:-)
More importantly from the photo's there is no provision for mounting a heatsink on the second CPU - I think the board may be a notional layout and does not really exist yet... The CPU support components (bypass caps, crystals etc.. are also not present or evident in the photo)
The 993's seem to be holding their value better than the later 996 water cooled cars. Personally I think the look better, in fact the new 997 looks more like a 993 than a 996. I purchased mine on e-bay for less than the price of a new Honda:-)
Every possbile way ? I doubt it.. - Each vehicle is engineered to a different set of design goals - if I want super gas mileage I'd buy the Honda, if I want a fast and great handling car I go Ferrari - not that you can't re-engineer a Honda to go fast or handle well but you will spend money to do it and its not in the design from the ground up so it ends up being a compromise usually. I prefer Porsches to Ferraris and own two of them, I have also owned a Mitsubishis and Nissans, and the Porsche is FAR better engineered than any of those cars - I drive my 993 every day to work (80 miles round trip) it gets reasonable gas mileage (~26 mpg hwy) and hardly needs any attention other than gas, tires and oil changes - my wifes Caravan has needed far more work than the 993 - numerous electrical problems etc... Contemporary Ferraris like are extremely well thought out and well engineered. I wish I could afford one !
Now what you gotta do, I'll tell you what you gotta do You got to pretend your face is a Maserati It's a Maserati It's a Maserati It's a gettin' hotty It's a Maserati, Maserati, Maserati It's a fast one too man, that thing's turbocharged You feel like a little fuel injection honey? I'll tell ya about it, I'll tell you about it I'll check out the hood scoop I gotta get that hood scoop off, shine and shine and buff I gotta buff it up, buff it up, buff it up, buff it up, buff it up, Yeah, shiny now baby, heh heh heh You've been drivin' all night long It's time to put the old Maserati away So you look for a garage, you think you see a garage Wait a minute, Hey!, there's one up ahead And the damn thing's open Hello! Get in there!
you make a valid point, I would rate what we came up with as very creative versus very innovative - it certainly provides a more intuitive way of interacting with our data than other techniques that have been done before - and it is very possible that it exists somewhere already but was never patented - as you say we shall wait and see:-)
I personally have three patents at various points in the process of filing - one for a hardware design (radar related), one for a search algorithm for a LIDAR, and one for a software MMI (Man Machine Interface) technique. The software patent would seem very obvious to anyone and in fact I was surprised I had never seen it before - it would be ridiculously easy to reverse engineer because its so simple and obvious, does that make it not innovative ? - I won't actually benefit from the patents other than a small cash bonus (very small) and am doing it mostly for the cool factor of having some patents on my resume. From a business perspective even if my company never builds anything that actually makes use of the patents they are still in a stronger position than if a competitor comes up with it and makes money on it. I think it is very difficult to draw a line at where something becomes innovative and patent worthy versus obvious - at any rate the MS patent is way to broad to stand up in any fair court of law IMHO.
RTG's don't release any chemical compounds, they are only used as heat sources (in this case heating banks of thermocouples to generate electricity) - the fuel pellets are usually bound in plastic to make handling safer.
Bouncing away from objects is bad - It might be OK in city driving where collision speeds would be lower but forget the highway. In Zap versus 18 wheeler you die, however your friends can take all the money you saved on gas to throw you a nice funeral.
My view of this is that use of some of these tools mean you are forever married to them - the code generated is obtuse and confusing if not downright absurd. I am sure Rational would love to create a whole mass of programmers that can generate code that only makes sense to the Rational tools and requires what amounts to reverse engineering to gain understanding of what it does if you have problems. Its a little to abstract for my taste - I don't know about you, but there is enough stuff runnig on our computers that I don't understand what it does without making my own source code part of it !
thats a fact, Rational tools in my experience are way over-repesented - One group at work proudly used the Rational tools to generate some code - it was the most obscure code I had ever seen - it was not even clear what half the modules did or were suppose to do. They gave me an executable to take to a subcontractor and try out - the subcontractor laughed at it (and so did I...) There is no escaping these tools, we just need to minimize the wasted time they cause... IMHO
you are correct !! Actually here are many time scales maintained all over the world the one in Paris is called BIPM, we have at least two major ones in the US - USNO (the official DoD timescale) and NIST (the National Time scale) - there are several more all over the world, and all of them are used to try and create a physical realization of time relative to the rotation of the earth around the sun. From time to time the scales are corrected for various errors that creep in (bad clocks, earth slowing down etc...) sometimes it seems a little odd as you noted
No argument about changing to another primary standard - the nice thing about Cesium standards is that they have been obtainable in relatively large numbers and are "mass" produced. As you probably know, based on your previous resposne - its possible to create an ensemble of clocks that are statistically better then a single clock (for long term stability) in this type of clock you can add other unique clocks (trapped ion, hydrogen masers, cesium fountains etc..) and contribute to superior long term performance of the whole ensemble - the Cesium and Rubidium standards on board every GPS satellite contributes to the GPS ensemble time scale for example.
trapped ion frequency standards are nothing new, NIST made one years ago, the only difference is that NPL uses Strontium instead of Mercury. While it appears to be more accurate than the NIST one, trapped ion standards are not very practical to build or run for everyday use and its not a primary frequency standard, since the definition of the second is in terms of Cesium resonance, only Cesium clocks are primary frequency standards.
Lets hope the drive does not really use 141 watts at idle, this is a little bit steep for a 2.5" drive - most laptop drives only use about 5 Watts at idle! To put it another way thats 28 Amps at 5V. I hope this is off by an order of magnitude !
Slashdot Mirror
This picture from the balloons payload camera says it all...
confused
at the 300 meter resolution cited in the story I wouldn't worry too much - they won't be reading any license plates...and unless you live in a REALLY big house, that won't show up in more than one pixel :-)
Ooops - my bad - you are right, I forgot VIA makes the chipset as well. the bigger parts are the Northbridge and Video maybe... Thanks !!
More importantly from the photo's there is no provision for mounting a heatsink on the second CPU - I think the board may be a notional layout and does not really exist yet... The CPU support components (bypass caps, crystals etc.. are also not present or evident in the photo)
More power to the server - we are being slashdotted !!
Question: Why would I use a service that was intentionally trying to deceive me ?
Answer: I wouldn't... bite my shiny metal ass Udi Manber..
Thats pretty funny - don't know why you got modded "Offtopic" I guess the mod was unfamiliar with the famous Pentium FDIV bug....
its called Binary Angle Measurement System, BAMS and it has been used for YEARS !!
The 993's seem to be holding their value better than the later 996 water cooled cars. Personally I think the look better, in fact the new 997 looks more like a 993 than a 996. I purchased mine on e-bay for less than the price of a new Honda :-)
Every possbile way ? I doubt it.. - Each vehicle is engineered to a different set of design goals - if I want super gas mileage I'd buy the Honda, if I want a fast and great handling car I go Ferrari - not that you can't re-engineer a Honda to go fast or handle well but you will spend money to do it and its not in the design from the ground up so it ends up being a compromise usually. I prefer Porsches to Ferraris and own two of them, I have also owned a Mitsubishis and Nissans, and the Porsche is FAR better engineered than any of those cars - I drive my 993 every day to work (80 miles round trip) it gets reasonable gas mileage (~26 mpg hwy) and hardly needs any attention other than gas, tires and oil changes - my wifes Caravan has needed far more work than the 993 - numerous electrical problems etc... Contemporary Ferraris like are extremely well thought out and well engineered. I wish I could afford one !
Be Sure to drink your Ovaltine.
Now what you gotta do, I'll tell you what you gotta do
You got to pretend your face is a Maserati
It's a Maserati
It's a Maserati
It's a gettin' hotty
It's a Maserati, Maserati, Maserati
It's a fast one too man, that thing's turbocharged
You feel like a little fuel injection honey?
I'll tell ya about it, I'll tell you about it
I'll check out the hood scoop
I gotta get that hood scoop off, shine and shine and buff
I gotta buff it up, buff it up, buff it up, buff it up, buff it up,
Yeah, shiny now baby, heh heh heh
You've been drivin' all night long
It's time to put the old Maserati away
So you look for a garage, you think you see a garage
Wait a minute, Hey!, there's one up ahead
And the damn thing's open
Hello! Get in there!
you make a valid point, I would rate what we came up with as very creative versus very innovative - it certainly provides a more intuitive way of interacting with our data than other techniques that have been done before - and it is very possible that it exists somewhere already but was never patented - as you say we shall wait and see :-)
I personally have three patents at various points in the process of filing - one for a hardware design (radar related), one for a search algorithm for a LIDAR, and one for a software MMI (Man Machine Interface) technique. The software patent would seem very obvious to anyone and in fact I was surprised I had never seen it before - it would be ridiculously easy to reverse engineer because its so simple and obvious, does that make it not innovative ? - I won't actually benefit from the patents other than a small cash bonus (very small) and am doing it mostly for the cool factor of having some patents on my resume. From a business perspective even if my company never builds anything that actually makes use of the patents they are still in a stronger position than if a competitor comes up with it and makes money on it. I think it is very difficult to draw a line at where something becomes innovative and patent worthy versus obvious - at any rate the MS patent is way to broad to stand up in any fair court of law IMHO.
RTG's don't release any chemical compounds, they are only used as heat sources (in this case heating banks of thermocouples to generate electricity) - the fuel pellets are usually bound in plastic to make handling safer.
Bouncing away from objects is bad - It might be OK in city driving where collision speeds would be lower but forget the highway. In Zap versus 18 wheeler you die, however your friends can take all the money you saved on gas to throw you a nice funeral.
Someone actually made "The Homer" a reality !
My view of this is that use of some of these tools mean you are forever married to them - the code generated is obtuse and confusing if not downright absurd. I am sure Rational would love to create a whole mass of programmers that can generate code that only makes sense to the Rational tools and requires what amounts to reverse engineering to gain understanding of what it does if you have problems. Its a little to abstract for my taste - I don't know about you, but there is enough stuff runnig on our computers that I don't understand what it does without making my own source code part of it !
thats a fact, Rational tools in my experience are way over-repesented - One group at work proudly used the Rational tools to generate some code - it was the most obscure code I had ever seen - it was not even clear what half the modules did or were suppose to do. They gave me an executable to take to a subcontractor and try out - the subcontractor laughed at it (and so did I...) There is no escaping these tools, we just need to minimize the wasted time they cause... IMHO
you are correct !! Actually here are many time scales maintained all over the world the one in Paris is called BIPM, we have at least two major ones in the US - USNO (the official DoD timescale) and NIST (the National Time scale) - there are several more all over the world, and all of them are used to try and create a physical realization of time relative to the rotation of the earth around the sun. From time to time the scales are corrected for various errors that creep in (bad clocks, earth slowing down etc...) sometimes it seems a little odd as you noted
No argument about changing to another primary standard - the nice thing about Cesium standards is that they have been obtainable in relatively large numbers and are "mass" produced. As you probably know, based on your previous resposne - its possible to create an ensemble of clocks that are statistically better then a single clock (for long term stability) in this type of clock you can add other unique clocks (trapped ion, hydrogen masers, cesium fountains etc..) and contribute to superior long term performance of the whole ensemble - the Cesium and Rubidium standards on board every GPS satellite contributes to the GPS ensemble time scale for example.
now this is a cool clock - it is mechanical and keeps time for 10,000 years ! http://www.kk.org/tools/page6-9.pdf
trapped ion frequency standards are nothing new, NIST made one years ago, the only difference is that NPL uses Strontium instead of Mercury. While it appears to be more accurate than the NIST one, trapped ion standards are not very practical to build or run for everyday use and its not a primary frequency standard, since the definition of the second is in terms of Cesium resonance, only Cesium clocks are primary frequency standards.
Lets hope the drive does not really use 141 watts at idle, this is a little bit steep for a 2.5" drive - most laptop drives only use about 5 Watts at idle!
To put it another way thats 28 Amps at 5V. I hope this is off by an order of magnitude !
Heck - what next, someone getting a patent on the combover ? Patenting of the combover