Also, many times the noise floor in the receiver is determined by the quality of the analog components used, not by an external interferer. The noise would be attenuated, but by the time you get the signal into the receiver the minus 1000dBm signal would be lost to noise in the components.
As a sidenote, shouldn't there be a way for the ground control to override the controls of a hijacked plane?
If ground control can do it, so can I. Or any other determined psycho. Sure it might be _very_ difficult, but everyone knows that most (all?) security can be broken. The first guy to figure it out holds onto it until he can get enough remote control pilots to slam a plane into every building in the nation. It's a good idea, but a lot of precations have to be taken to ensure that this improves everyone's safety, not makes it worse.
Unfortunately it is not always so clear cut. Peace with one enemy could mean war with another. What good would it do to appease one attacker only to find out you've pissed off another. The only way to avoid such a situation is to prove that you won't take it lying down. It is most likely going to be bad... but in reality what other course of action is there? Even if peace with one enemy doesn't anger another, I bet there are a lot of pissed off people who will learn they can get what they want by blowing up buildings. What good will that lead to? It's a bad situation no matter how you look at it.
Not everyone who wants a cheaper (free?) Windows compatible OS has the option of running a pirated copy of Windows. This would be good for large companies who shell out untold millions on Windows licenses to be "compatible" with everyone else. Switching to something like this could save them alot of money, which would clearly go to Trumpet. Seems good to me.
This is more or less what NAT does. Instead of assinging a port for each device it assigns one for each connection to the external network. It maintains a table to map the incoming/outgoing messages to the corresponding internal IP/port for each connection. The main number on the public side of the network is assigned by someone, i.e. the IP address that your ISP gives you. Using this method you could map port 80 to nothing and the NAT would dump it. The problem is that if an external person wants to contact a webserver on your side of the network legally they have no means of doing so without you telling them more information than your IP address, specifically they also need to know to use a port other than 80. Combine that with ports for telnet, ssh, etc and you have a lot of annoying mappings to setup and share with people legally connecting to your box. It does fix the IP problem though, assuming that there are fewer than 65536 connections to the private side of the network.
A lot of companies are working on support for mobile IP and mobile layer 2. It won't be long until the handoffs are seamless to the IP layer. It will require a mobile IP aware router in a couple of places, but that's not that big of a deal. As for the the 802.11 handoffs, you said that the cellular system handles handoffs (obviously). It shouldn't be that large of an undertaking to apply similar technologies to 802.11. In the end it just comes down to which access point has higher signal strength. You tell your current access point to tell your router to switch the new access point. Listen on both for a short period to collect stray packets, then switch entirley over to the new access point. At least I think this is how Mobile IP works...
Assuming that DSL is not available in your area due to the distance to the central office, I don't see how this would help. The article says you need to share the same central office, where I assume the link is made from your place to your friend's. If this distance is too far for DSL in the first place, connecting to you friend won't help anyway. Am I wrong, or is there any other way that this could work if you are in the above situation?
They mentioned open sourcing the design specs for the various nano technologies. It was said that this may not provide an incentive for innovation and the like, standard arguements. The standard defense of an Open Source model then is to sell support. Seems like if anyone can use the design, then what will truly set the nano tech companies apart will be the ability to support the technology once it is in the field. I hope I never have to call and have some tech support guy try to diaganose my nano technology problem in my body.
No, he is right about the square root. Unless your search is broken, you should encounter the first prime number, which is less than the square root of the product, before you encounter the one that is above the square root.
The problem is that most people don't see this as a new game, just an extension of the current ones. No one considers that there is a company that needs initial capital to launch som/ething like this. They expect it to be as stable and available as its predecessors because that is what they have become used to. This is of course rediculous, but it screws these newer companies anyway.
Before the Sci-fi miniseries I had not read Dune or any of its sequels. My brother watched all three nights of the miniseries while I found something else to do. I specifically avoided it so that I could read the books _before_ seeing the interpretation of them. I am glad I did too. There is nothing worse than reading a book and not enjoying it as much as the movie version because it appears that the author left something out (which is obviously not the case, but that is how it feels none the less). I know a lot of people are now going to see the Fellowship of the Ring without reading it first. For the people who's interest is sparked enough to pick up the book, they will enjoy the it less for having seen the movie first. There is still time though, hopefully they will grab a copy from somewhere before December, but I doubt it.
It's not made for lefties. We all use both hands to type, but we choose which hand to use for the mouse, either right or left. This design allows the you to use the mouse with your right hand. I think it would be more difficult to get people to switch their mouse or stylus hand than it is to get them to be slightly more dexterious with their left hand.
I don't think the space bar thing will be a problem. You probably don't hold the space bar when typing normally, you tap it. If you start getting Ls intstead of Ss, you probably would have already noticed a problem with repeated spaces that you'd have to delete anyway.
I definitely agree that this thing is doomed however. I am not sure why you would want this keyboard over a foldout one for a PDA, and it seems pretty pointless for most tasks at your PC.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, many times the noise floor in the receiver is determined by the quality of the analog components used, not by an external interferer. The noise would be attenuated, but by the time you get the signal into the receiver the minus 1000dBm signal would be lost to noise in the components.
But the dead have neither safety nor liberty...
As a sidenote, shouldn't there be a way for the ground control to override the controls of a hijacked plane?
If ground control can do it, so can I. Or any other determined psycho. Sure it might be _very_ difficult, but everyone knows that most (all?) security can be broken. The first guy to figure it out holds onto it until he can get enough remote control pilots to slam a plane into every building in the nation. It's a good idea, but a lot of precations have to be taken to ensure that this improves everyone's safety, not makes it worse.
Unfortunately it is not always so clear cut. Peace with one enemy could mean war with another. What good would it do to appease one attacker only to find out you've pissed off another. The only way to avoid such a situation is to prove that you won't take it lying down. It is most likely going to be bad... but in reality what other course of action is there? Even if peace with one enemy doesn't anger another, I bet there are a lot of pissed off people who will learn they can get what they want by blowing up buildings. What good will that lead to? It's a bad situation no matter how you look at it.
Not everyone who wants a cheaper (free?) Windows compatible OS has the option of running a pirated copy of Windows. This would be good for large companies who shell out untold millions on Windows licenses to be "compatible" with everyone else. Switching to something like this could save them alot of money, which would clearly go to Trumpet. Seems good to me.
This is more or less what NAT does. Instead of assinging a port for each device it assigns one for each connection to the external network. It maintains a table to map the incoming/outgoing messages to the corresponding internal IP/port for each connection. The main number on the public side of the network is assigned by someone, i.e. the IP address that your ISP gives you. Using this method you could map port 80 to nothing and the NAT would dump it. The problem is that if an external person wants to contact a webserver on your side of the network legally they have no means of doing so without you telling them more information than your IP address, specifically they also need to know to use a port other than 80. Combine that with ports for telnet, ssh, etc and you have a lot of annoying mappings to setup and share with people legally connecting to your box. It does fix the IP problem though, assuming that there are fewer than 65536 connections to the private side of the network.
A lot of companies are working on support for mobile IP and mobile layer 2. It won't be long until the handoffs are seamless to the IP layer. It will require a mobile IP aware router in a couple of places, but that's not that big of a deal. As for the the 802.11 handoffs, you said that the cellular system handles handoffs (obviously). It shouldn't be that large of an undertaking to apply similar technologies to 802.11. In the end it just comes down to which access point has higher signal strength. You tell your current access point to tell your router to switch the new access point. Listen on both for a short period to collect stray packets, then switch entirley over to the new access point. At least I think this is how Mobile IP works...
Assuming that DSL is not available in your area due to the distance to the central office, I don't see how this would help. The article says you need to share the same central office, where I assume the link is made from your place to your friend's. If this distance is too far for DSL in the first place, connecting to you friend won't help anyway. Am I wrong, or is there any other way that this could work if you are in the above situation?
They mentioned open sourcing the design specs for the various nano technologies. It was said that this may not provide an incentive for innovation and the like, standard arguements. The standard defense of an Open Source model then is to sell support. Seems like if anyone can use the design, then what will truly set the nano tech companies apart will be the ability to support the technology once it is in the field. I hope I never have to call and have some tech support guy try to diaganose my nano technology problem in my body.
Yeah, but he is talking about the Nintendo Power Pad I think. It was a nightmare to use, but it was hilarious that you could.
.o .o: No such file or directory
% rm *
rm:
% ls
%
No, he is right about the square root. Unless your search is broken, you should encounter the first prime number, which is less than the square root of the product, before you encounter the one that is above the square root.
.o .o: No such file or directory
% rm *
rm:
% ls
%
The problem is that most people don't see this as a new game, just an extension of the current ones. No one considers that there is a company that needs initial capital to launch som/ething like this. They expect it to be as stable and available as its predecessors because that is what they have become used to. This is of course rediculous, but it screws these newer companies anyway.
.o .o: No such file or directory
% rm *
rm:
% ls
%
Before the Sci-fi miniseries I had not read Dune or any of its sequels. My brother watched all three nights of the miniseries while I found something else to do. I specifically avoided it so that I could read the books _before_ seeing the interpretation of them. I am glad I did too. There is nothing worse than reading a book and not enjoying it as much as the movie version because it appears that the author left something out (which is obviously not the case, but that is how it feels none the less). I know a lot of people are now going to see the Fellowship of the Ring without reading it first. For the people who's interest is sparked enough to pick up the book, they will enjoy the it less for having seen the movie first. There is still time though, hopefully they will grab a copy from somewhere before December, but I doubt it.
.o .o: No such file or directory
% rm *
rm:
% ls
%
"Now I can watch the Simpson's from 40 blocks awayay"
It's not made for lefties. We all use both hands to type, but we choose which hand to use for the mouse, either right or left. This design allows the you to use the mouse with your right hand. I think it would be more difficult to get people to switch their mouse or stylus hand than it is to get them to be slightly more dexterious with their left hand. I don't think the space bar thing will be a problem. You probably don't hold the space bar when typing normally, you tap it. If you start getting Ls intstead of Ss, you probably would have already noticed a problem with repeated spaces that you'd have to delete anyway. I definitely agree that this thing is doomed however. I am not sure why you would want this keyboard over a foldout one for a PDA, and it seems pretty pointless for most tasks at your PC.
What would a 100% increase on 1.0 be? 2.0
What would a 50% increase on 1.0 be? 1.5
What would a 50% decrease on 1.0 be? 2/3
Now, what would a 250% increase on 1.0 be? 3.5