None of this is true for non mains-powered, non-RF-emitting devices. We make open source hardware (Arduino-based autopilots--diydrones.com) in the US, and there are no such restrictions for us. Please don't generalize about electronics. Small battery-powered devices are easy to make and sell.
Singer is referring to our site, DIYDrones.com, where we've open sourced the technology to make a sub-$1,000 UAV. Unfortunately, Singer is totally clueless about technology, so he doesn't know the difference between our relatively modest UAVs and a Raven.
We run an open source UAV community at DIYDrones. We fly under RC rules (under 400 feet, etc) and our aircraft (fixed wing and helis) are typically under 3-4 pounds. We even have some UAVs with Lego Mindstorms autopilots!
Given that these are basically toys created by amateurs, it's going to be really hard to regulate them. That's why we want the FAA to create a de minimus regulatory category (under 3 pounds, under 1,000 feet, away from built-up areas, airports, etc), similar to what the FCC did with open access wireless spectrum. Otherwise, we're going to completely kill innovation in the independent commercial sector by creating an impossible regulatory burden.
That's not what the post says. It says that the site that lists CEO blogs doesn't fit the bill as a list of Fortune 500 blogs, not because CEO blogger don't count but because most of the CEOs on that list aren't from Fortune 500 companies. (And most Fortune 500 companies that have blogs aren't on that list)
More BT fandom: last night Bram Cohen won Wired Mag's Rave award for software designer of the year. Here's one of the news reports. He was in SF to receive the award.
So heavy that they slapped your chest like a pair of binoculars as you walked. So confused that in a long conversation with someone they'd light up in recognition over and over again, thinking that you'd gone and come back. Impossible to read despite a huge screen, forcing the *main function* of a badge, giving your name and affiliation, to be relegated to a little (also unreadable) paper sticker at the bottom.
All in all the laughingstock of the conference. New Scientist must not have been there.
In Feb Wired magazine had an article, headlined Immortal Code, about how some software survives the implosions of its company.
"The CEO goes to trial. The programmers hit the street. And yet sometimes a piece of code is so elegant, so evolved, that it outlasts everything else."
The main example was the DragonSoft speech recognition code, but it also goes into "software repo men".
Actually, it was on p. 6, and not even the lead fiction review. That the NYT would grant it such a long review is miraculous enough; it was too much to hope that it would be on the front page.
Uh, maybe I missed this semester, but voltage has got nothing to do with it. See, power=amperage, not voltage. Don't use the phone and power consumption is zip. Use it and power consumption is still practically zip.
Do this experiment. Put a telephone wire on your tongue and call the number. Perhaps a tiny buzzing sensation? Now put your tongue in an light bulb socket with the power on. Different, no?
These guys are in the tech industry. They're hardwired to do this stuff and it's good R&D, too. This is not gold-plated bathtubs; it's solid bleeding edge tech, which will eventually trickle down into better products for all of us.
If you've got a problem with wealth, go beat up on Donald Trump. These guys are just geeks who were in the right place at the right time. If you had a billion dollars in stock would you do any different?
(And yes, most of them give generously to charity, too)
It's peak frame rate that matters: i.e. the frame rate at the moment that you've got the most number of objects on the screen. Just like you don't want only enough server capacity to handle your average traffic, but instead need a lot extra to handle peak load, so frame rates above 72 ensure that you won't drop below 60 or so even in the most complex scenes.
Will that work point-to-multipoint (which is what I meant by a proper LAN)? So if I've got three or four wireless devices, I can serve them all simultaneously off a single 802.11b card in peer-to-peer mode with no need for an access point?
Well, that would be a savings of nearly $800-1000 (when you included 802.11b's access point and LAN cards together) and HomeRF now matches 802.11b's 11mbs. And what makes you think that either HomeRF and Bluetooth will only be Windows/Mac? My understanding is that Linux plans are in the works for both.
My understanding is the Cybiko has a very restrictive policy regarding use of its SDK. Pretty much everything you do becomes their property, to be marketed through them. *Not* open source, by any means.
The 2.4ghz band is available in most countries around the world. Two exception, until recently, were France and Japan, but both have agreed to clear the band (I think it was the military in France that was on it).
Intel and a bunch of others are pushing HomeRF, which will be cheaper than 802.11b. And Bluetooth, which will be cheaper yet, will be able to provide point-to-point and point-to-multimpoint wireless data at 1Mbs, although initially its functionality as a full LAN will be pretty limited (no more than 8 devices per piconet, for example)
Some demographers do argue that Gen Y (those born between 1976 and 96, although definition differ) is larger than the Boomers when you include immigrants. But the fact is that it depends on how you define each generation, and nobody agrees. Do you do it by birth date, in 20 year increments? By a common unifying experience (depression, technology, war)? Or by the peaks and troughs in birth cycles?
As of this year, the twenty-year generations are sized as follows (according to this page at the Census dept):
0-20: 78.5m
21-40: 78.3m
41-60: 73.2M
The first roughly aligns with Gen Y, the last roughly with the Boomers. That's the point Katz is trying to make, I think
Slashdot Mirror
None of this is true for non mains-powered, non-RF-emitting devices. We make open source hardware (Arduino-based autopilots--diydrones.com) in the US, and there are no such restrictions for us. Please don't generalize about electronics. Small battery-powered devices are easy to make and sell.
Singer is referring to our site, DIYDrones.com, where we've open sourced the technology to make a sub-$1,000 UAV. Unfortunately, Singer is totally clueless about technology, so he doesn't know the difference between our relatively modest UAVs and a Raven.
DIY Drones: amateur Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and open-source Predators.
We run an open source UAV community at DIYDrones. We fly under RC rules (under 400 feet, etc) and our aircraft (fixed wing and helis) are typically under 3-4 pounds. We even have some UAVs with Lego Mindstorms autopilots!
Given that these are basically toys created by amateurs, it's going to be really hard to regulate them. That's why we want the FAA to create a de minimus regulatory category (under 3 pounds, under 1,000 feet, away from built-up areas, airports, etc), similar to what the FCC did with open access wireless spectrum. Otherwise, we're going to completely kill innovation in the independent commercial sector by creating an impossible regulatory burden.
Many high-wing R/C planes use the rudder for roll. They're inherently stable, and rudder turns tend to bank because the weight is under the wing.
That's not what the post says. It says that the site that lists CEO blogs doesn't fit the bill as a list of Fortune 500 blogs, not because CEO blogger don't count but because most of the CEOs on that list aren't from Fortune 500 companies. (And most Fortune 500 companies that have blogs aren't on that list)
More BT fandom: last night Bram Cohen won Wired Mag's Rave award for software designer of the year. Here's one of the news reports. He was in SF to receive the award.
So heavy that they slapped your chest like a pair of binoculars as you walked. So confused that in a long conversation with someone they'd light up in recognition over and over again, thinking that you'd gone and come back. Impossible to read despite a huge screen, forcing the *main function* of a badge, giving your name and affiliation, to be relegated to a little (also unreadable) paper sticker at the bottom.
All in all the laughingstock of the conference. New Scientist must not have been there.
In Feb Wired magazine had an article, headlined Immortal Code, about how some software survives the implosions of its company. "The CEO goes to trial. The programmers hit the street. And yet sometimes a piece of code is so elegant, so evolved, that it outlasts everything else." The main example was the DragonSoft speech recognition code, but it also goes into "software repo men".
Wired Mag had a good profile of Fossil a few months back, covering both the SPOT watches and the Palm OS ones.
Actually, it was on p. 6, and not even the lead fiction review. That the NYT would grant it such a long review is miraculous enough; it was too much to hope that it would be on the front page.
"Orwell's Revenge: The 1984 Palimpsest" made the same point, better, in 1994.
yeah, and I'm an idiot too, or at least a hasty poster. Yeah P=VI etc. I know, I know. Still, you get my point....
Uh, maybe I missed this semester, but voltage has got nothing to do with it. See, power=amperage, not voltage. Don't use the phone and power consumption is zip. Use it and power consumption is still practically zip.
Do this experiment. Put a telephone wire on your tongue and call the number. Perhaps a tiny buzzing sensation? Now put your tongue in an light bulb socket with the power on. Different, no?
The original poster is, sad to say, an idiot.
Uh, none?
These guys are in the tech industry. They're hardwired to do this stuff and it's good R&D, too. This is not gold-plated bathtubs; it's solid bleeding edge tech, which will eventually trickle down into better products for all of us.
If you've got a problem with wealth, go beat up on Donald Trump. These guys are just geeks who were in the right place at the right time. If you had a billion dollars in stock would you do any different?
(And yes, most of them give generously to charity, too)
It's peak frame rate that matters: i.e. the frame rate at the moment that you've got the most number of objects on the screen. Just like you don't want only enough server capacity to handle your average traffic, but instead need a lot extra to handle peak load, so frame rates above 72 ensure that you won't drop below 60 or so even in the most complex scenes.
Will that work point-to-multipoint (which is what I meant by a proper LAN)? So if I've got three or four wireless devices, I can serve them all simultaneously off a single 802.11b card in peer-to-peer mode with no need for an access point?
You know a way to make 802.11b work as a LAN (ie, not just peer-to-peer) without an access point? Do tell.
Well, that would be a savings of nearly $800-1000 (when you included 802.11b's access point and LAN cards together) and HomeRF now matches 802.11b's 11mbs. And what makes you think that either HomeRF and Bluetooth will only be Windows/Mac? My understanding is that Linux plans are in the works for both.
My understanding is the Cybiko has a very restrictive policy regarding use of its SDK. Pretty much everything you do becomes their property, to be marketed through them. *Not* open source, by any means.
The 2.4ghz band is available in most countries around the world. Two exception, until recently, were France and Japan, but both have agreed to clear the band (I think it was the military in France that was on it).
Intel and a bunch of others are pushing HomeRF, which will be cheaper than 802.11b. And Bluetooth, which will be cheaper yet, will be able to provide point-to-point and point-to-multimpoint wireless data at 1Mbs, although initially its functionality as a full LAN will be pretty limited (no more than 8 devices per piconet, for example)
Some demographers do argue that Gen Y (those born between 1976 and 96, although definition differ) is larger than the Boomers when you include immigrants. But the fact is that it depends on how you define each generation, and nobody agrees. Do you do it by birth date, in 20 year increments? By a common unifying experience (depression, technology, war)? Or by the peaks and troughs in birth cycles?
As of this year, the twenty-year generations are sized as follows (according to this page at the Census dept):
0-20: 78.5m
21-40: 78.3m
41-60: 73.2M
The first roughly aligns with Gen Y, the last roughly with the Boomers. That's the point Katz is trying to make, I think
No, honey. It's just the table setting itself.