On that topic. Can anyone actually give reasons why uClinux is better than other embedded systems? OTHER than "It's free man!" because we all know that already.
A stream of particles travelling down both arms simultaneously, without being waves, would not create the interference pattern we see. Same goes for light.
We can say that a probability wave travelled through both slits simultaneously, and collapsed.
Quantum mechanics shows how everything is both a wave and a particle. Light is no exception, it's just at one extreme end of things.
Actually, this exact question was asked at an Olympics of the Mind competition back in 1990 or so. Teams had to submit as many creative answers as they could.
Answers were fantastic, far more creative than this one, included, but not limited to:
Accellerate the building towards c until it appears the same size as the baromoeter, and use the resulting speed to calculate the original size.
Drop it off, and observe the impact damage it makes to the ground. calculate the forces needed to do this.
Run far away from the building and hold the barometer at arm's lentgh until it appears the same size as the building. DO some trig.
Drop the barometer, and listen for the delay betwen it hitting the ground and the sound reaching you. Calculate height based on speed of sound.
ANd I really wish I could remember some of hte other 50-odd answers that one team came up with... it was fantastic.
And I think the thing about Bohr is an urban legend.
It moves forward, as others said, because the air in the back becomes more dense, the air at the front, less dense, so the helium balloon moves away from the dense area.
The air in the back is more dense because the car is accellerating. Similarly, the air is more dense near the surface of the earth because of gravity.
And as we all know, gravity and accelleration are indistinguishable (locally).
So. Both cause the balloon (via their effect on the atmosphere) to move opposite the vector the force is applied in.
(In this case, G + accelleration would put it on an angle, but your balloon is on a string.. etc.. etc..)
So.. given that any other particle can also be viewed purely as a wave.. does your statement not hold true for all reality?
A proton is a quantized wave. So is an electron.
Any particle stream behaves as a wave to some degree. The wavelength just gets extremely long as you get away from c, so the effect seems to disappear.
Moving data between drives will always be faster if you have a controller in between them handling traffic for you. This is why scsi works far better. Unless you factor in these new ide raid controllers that are true controllers.
I have high end scsi systems I maintain. I would never suggest replacing them with IDE. But for a home system, an IDE raid controller from promise or 3ware would absolutely be a better solution. A good chunk of the performance of scsi, especially for the money. ANd man, don't stripe. IF you want to stripe, go all out and do raid 10. (not raid 0+1)
I think people generally get this wrong. THey think IDE is to SCSI as winmodems are to real modems, ie, all processing and hard work done by the cpu.
Not true.
The controller hardware in the case of IDE is on the drive itself. In scsi, there is actually less hardware and logic on the drive itself; those functions are moved to the controller.
The main bottleneck in IDE is the fact that it does not share a bus well. 2 drives on one channel is very hack-ish. SCSI, of course, was designed to be a bus, and to be efficient at what it does.
I'm confused.. you say you have 2 drives, striped, and then talk about copying big files between them? IF they are striped they are one volume, and you can't copy things between them.
I think the only reason IDE is more cpu intensive is because there are some functions, such as copying between drives, that scsi drives can do directly over the scsi bus with very little intervention from the cpu, and with ide, the cpu has to be involved in shuffling the data (or rather, with traditional ide controllers).
Oh yeah. A traditional ide 'controller' is not a controller at all. It's more along the lines of a raw i/o port. It has an i/o address, and a buffered (electrically speaking) set of i/o lines. It's even more 'basic' than your parallel port. I think you used to be able to build an IDE controller with a pair of 8255's. Certainly they are a bit more complex now, but still, they are a raw i/o port, with no onboard functionality whatsoever.
The ide/scsi argument is still silly. If you want lots of drives working together, use scsi3 or fiberchannel. If you are at home, use IDE simply because it's way cheaper and certainly fast enough for you, especially with all the new funky ide controllers.
It seems a lot of people are claiming problems with disconnection/weather/etc.
Solutions: This is satellite folks. It's radio. There is a wealth of knowledge out there about how to get new amplifiers/bigger dish/etc. I'm not suggesting you go outside any legal limits, or try to overpower things... but as with all satellite stuff.. if you are having trouble getting through weather, or with weak signal, you need to amplify and/or get a bigger dish.
Don't get so riled up. IT's PR spin, nothing else.
Ranting about it here is preaching to the converted.
They know it's not illegal. They just want it to be, and if big important people get up in the big media and start saying it is, believe it or not, lots of Americans start to believe it too... which curbs the behavior, which is what they want.
If someone taps your phone or otherwise gets your number and uses it, why does this concern you? The worst that can happen is you have to make one phone call to your card issuer to tell him you didn't make the charges.
If they use your number, they are not defrauding you. They are defrauding the merchant by using a card that is not theirs (the issuer will cancel the transaction and the merchant will not get paid.)
One of the main benefits of credit cards are that the responsbility for validation rests on the merchant, not on you. Unless your card is physically stolen and you don't report it, you do not have to pay for fraudulent use whatsoever.
Most say you are liable for fraud only if your CARD is stolen, and only for the time between it's theft and when you report it to the company.
Any other fraudulent use of your credit card number you are simply NOT liable for. Remember, it's not really your number, and the card is not really yours. It's the property of the issuer, it says so on the back. It's a (weak) security token they issue you in order to identify yourself as someone who has a line of credit. If someone uses that, fraudulently, it is a screwup on the part of the merchant, or the bank. You do not pay.
If your contract says otherwise, or puts any other liability on you (other than normal, responsible behavior of course), shop around and find something better.
I realize it's a pain if someone has your number, and starts using it. It can be really inconvenient. But my point is.. rather than treating this like property that they have stolen from us, just like stealing our cash, we should be looking to the credit card companies to make sure this does not become our problem... because ultimately, it's theirs.
Hmm. I thought it was a 2 bit system. (no pun intended)
one bit for copyright, one for original.
If copyright & original is set, making a copy is okay. THe cdopy should have original turned off and copyright should stay in whatever state it was on before.
If copyright is on and original is off, copying shoudl be denied.
There will be a maximum specified horizontal (measured in Khz) and vertical (measured in Hz) frequencies.
Vertical is what you normally call refresh rate.
Now, if you start putting, say, 1600x1200, that's 1200 scanlines per screen. Take your horizontal frequency, muliply it by those 1200 horizontal lines that have to be drawn before each vertical refresh, and you'll find where the limiting factor is.
The monitor can't scan horizontally fast enough to keep up with it's maximum vertical rate at high resolutions.
Perhaps that's because LCD's don't have refresh rates? The are not driven by an electron beam scanning back and forth?
IF your LCD has a 'refresh rate' of 70hz that just means that the conversion circuitry that takes your analog VGA signal works at 70hz. There is absolutely no reason to make it work any faster, because the effect does not propagate to the visible screen...
Slashdot Mirror
Explain forbidden? It's my printer, I own it outright. I can do whatever I want with it, including use bizarre ink.
What you get for that cheap is not relevant.. you are still ultimately purchasing hardware outright.
I assume you meant anbesol..
So rubbing a topical anaesthetic on a frogs head kills it?
And uhh.. why is it you are killing frogs? Serial killer in training?
Sounds like bunk to me. Frogs eating ducks? Give me a break.
is where they are bringing this guy up on fraud charges and suing his ass into the ground/ruining his life.
Am I missing something?
What a feat for mankind.
On that topic. Can anyone actually give reasons why uClinux is better than other embedded systems? OTHER than "It's free man!" because we all know that already.
Sorry. I thought he was referring to physical layer connections.
By the way... the inherent incompatability of that method over satellite is bunk.
I maintain several satellite interent connections (500+ms pings) and we utilize no such software or techniques.
Of course, we're not using starband.. we're using much larger dishes with more power on commercial grade services.
THe software has to do with how starband is structured, not satellite in general.
Sorry, no.
A stream of particles travelling down both arms simultaneously, without being waves, would not create the interference pattern we see.
Same goes for light.
We can say that a probability wave travelled through both slits simultaneously, and collapsed.
Quantum mechanics shows how everything is both a wave and a particle. Light is no exception, it's just at one extreme end of things.
Are you disputing that or something?
can I call you pigfucker? Thanks.'
I realize the C stands for copyright.
The DMCA is *related* to copyright, and is based on additional measures to protected copyrightten works.
It is not copyright by itself.
Actually, this exact question was asked at an Olympics of the Mind competition back in 1990 or so. Teams had to submit as many creative answers as they could.
Answers were fantastic, far more creative than this one, included, but not limited to:
Accellerate the building towards c until it appears the same size as the baromoeter, and use the resulting speed to calculate the original size.
Drop it off, and observe the impact damage it makes to the ground. calculate the forces needed to do this.
Run far away from the building and hold the barometer at arm's lentgh until it appears the same size as the building. DO some trig.
Drop the barometer, and listen for the delay betwen it hitting the ground and the sound reaching you. Calculate height based on speed of sound.
ANd I really wish I could remember some of hte other 50-odd answers that one team came up with... it was fantastic.
And I think the thing about Bohr is an urban legend.
It moves forward, as others said, because the air in the back becomes more dense, the air at the front, less dense, so the helium balloon moves away from the dense area.
The air in the back is more dense because the car is accellerating.
Similarly, the air is more dense near the surface of the earth because of gravity.
And as we all know, gravity and accelleration are indistinguishable (locally).
So. Both cause the balloon (via their effect on the atmosphere) to move opposite the vector the force is applied in.
(In this case, G + accelleration would put it on an angle, but your balloon is on a string.. etc.. etc..)
So.. given that any other particle can also be viewed purely as a wave.. does your statement not hold true for all reality?
A proton is a quantized wave.
So is an electron.
Any particle stream behaves as a wave to some degree. The wavelength just gets extremely long as you get away from c, so the effect seems to disappear.
You are disputing the fact that light behaves both as a particle and as a wave?
That flies in the face of a great many years of modern physics you know.
Saying they are particles that propgate as waves is innacurate, of course.. it is merely light, and exhibits properties of both.
You are not violating copyright law.
You are violating the DMCA.
The DMCA != Copyright law.
If you are in the US.
They are about the same for a single drive.
Moving data between drives will always be faster if you have a controller in between them handling traffic for you. This is why scsi works far better.
Unless you factor in these new ide raid controllers that are true controllers.
I have high end scsi systems I maintain. I would never suggest replacing them with IDE. But for a home system, an IDE raid controller from promise or 3ware would absolutely be a better solution. A good chunk of the performance of scsi, especially for the money.
ANd man, don't stripe. IF you want to stripe, go all out and do raid 10. (not raid 0+1)
I think people generally get this wrong. THey think IDE is to SCSI as winmodems are to real modems, ie, all processing and hard work done by the cpu.
Not true.
The controller hardware in the case of IDE is on the drive itself. In scsi, there is actually less hardware and logic on the drive itself; those functions are moved to the controller.
The main bottleneck in IDE is the fact that it does not share a bus well. 2 drives on one channel is very hack-ish. SCSI, of course, was designed to be a bus, and to be efficient at what it does.
I'm confused.. you say you have 2 drives, striped, and then talk about copying big files between them? IF they are striped they are one volume, and you can't copy things between them.
I think the only reason IDE is more cpu intensive is because there are some functions, such as copying between drives, that scsi drives can do directly over the scsi bus with very little intervention from the cpu, and with ide, the cpu has to be involved in shuffling the data (or rather, with traditional ide controllers).
Oh yeah. A traditional ide 'controller' is not a controller at all. It's more along the lines of a raw i/o port. It has an i/o address, and a buffered (electrically speaking) set of i/o lines. It's even more 'basic' than your parallel port. I think you used to be able to build an IDE controller with a pair of 8255's.
Certainly they are a bit more complex now, but still, they are a raw i/o port, with no onboard functionality whatsoever.
The ide/scsi argument is still silly. If you want lots of drives working together, use scsi3 or fiberchannel. If you are at home, use IDE simply because it's way cheaper and certainly fast enough for you, especially with all the new funky ide controllers.
It seems a lot of people are claiming problems with disconnection/weather/etc.
Solutions: This is satellite folks. It's radio. There is a wealth of knowledge out there about how to get new amplifiers/bigger dish/etc. I'm not suggesting you go outside any legal limits, or try to overpower things... but as with all satellite stuff.. if you are having trouble getting through weather, or with weak signal, you need to amplify and/or get a bigger dish.
It is not possible that it MUST be directly connected. The nature of the ethernet standard ensures this is not necessary.
There is no way for the computer or modem to tell if it is directly connected, or connected via several switches/bridges/etc.
Don't get so riled up. IT's PR spin, nothing else.
Ranting about it here is preaching to the converted.
They know it's not illegal. They just want it to be, and if big important people get up in the big media and start saying it is, believe it or not, lots of Americans start to believe it too... which curbs the behavior, which is what they want.
If someone taps your phone or otherwise gets your number and uses it, why does this concern you?
The worst that can happen is you have to make one phone call to your card issuer to tell him you didn't make the charges.
If they use your number, they are not defrauding you. They are defrauding the merchant by using a card that is not theirs (the issuer will cancel the transaction and the merchant will not get paid.)
One of the main benefits of credit cards are that the responsbility for validation rests on the merchant, not on you. Unless your card is physically stolen and you don't report it, you do not have to pay for fraudulent use whatsoever.
Check your credit card contract.
Most say you are liable for fraud only if your CARD is stolen, and only for the time between it's theft and when you report it to the company.
Any other fraudulent use of your credit card number you are simply NOT liable for. Remember, it's not really your number, and the card is not really yours. It's the property of the issuer, it says so on the back. It's a (weak) security token they issue you in order to identify yourself as someone who has a line of credit. If someone uses that, fraudulently, it is a screwup on the part of the merchant, or the bank. You do not pay.
If your contract says otherwise, or puts any other liability on you (other than normal, responsible behavior of course), shop around and find something better.
I realize it's a pain if someone has your number, and starts using it. It can be really inconvenient. But my point is.. rather than treating this like property that they have stolen from us, just like stealing our cash, we should be looking to the credit card companies to make sure this does not become our problem... because ultimately, it's theirs.
Hmm. I thought it was a 2 bit system. (no pun intended)
one bit for copyright, one for original.
If copyright & original is set, making a copy is okay. THe cdopy should have original turned off and copyright should stay in whatever state it was on before.
If copyright is on and original is off, copying shoudl be denied.
There is no such thing as plain 'refresh rate'.
There will be a maximum specified horizontal (measured in Khz) and vertical (measured in Hz) frequencies.
Vertical is what you normally call refresh rate.
Now, if you start putting, say, 1600x1200, that's 1200 scanlines per screen. Take your horizontal frequency, muliply it by those 1200 horizontal lines that have to be drawn before each vertical refresh, and you'll find where the limiting factor is.
The monitor can't scan horizontally fast enough to keep up with it's maximum vertical rate at high resolutions.
Perhaps that's because LCD's don't have refresh rates? The are not driven by an electron beam scanning back and forth?
IF your LCD has a 'refresh rate' of 70hz that just means that the conversion circuitry that takes your analog VGA signal works at 70hz. There is absolutely no reason to make it work any faster, because the effect does not propagate to the visible screen...
Yeah. I've seen it in a few areas in Canada.
but a brave new solution to our problems it is not.
Or MMDS, or whatever they call it...
is it not usually unidirectional?
If wireless cable were so great, don't you think cable companies would be using it?