It's a basic design issue of the it's in the cloud man. To many of these IoT either connect directly to wifi and call home or the bridge box does the same. Vera has it about right the logic is all local with the cloud doing the glue of getting mobile apps etc to work.
Really the IoT needs a two tier design a local controller that is fully functional and reasonably secure devices. That local controller should be expected to be updated and upgraded on a regular basis the devices themselves should not expect the same. The protocols should reflect that simple and well defined. To this end things like zwave have it about right (they could use better over the air security) but a temp sensors is a temp sensor pretty much look at SNMP as the standard for getting useful data over an unreliable network with a standard that lasts for decades.
Waste heat? Heat is generally what they want to produce to make steam to run through turbines to make electricity. Heat can also be used to separate water for H fuel, desalination etc etc etc. Or current designs are wasteful because they do only one thing and throw out a lot of energy. It's mostly a PR and regulation issue people would say the desalinated water could be radioactive and the regulators want to oversee anything even tangentially related to the plants.
The law is not about making a civilized society it's about the bare minimum of required regulations so we can live with each other. The basic premise for any criminal law is would you kill somebody for doing it?
Seatbelt laws are dumb, your logic is that since we have socialized medicine society has the right to police any behavior that would place a burden on that socialized medicine. Extend that out and suddenly you have a reason to police everything by that same standard.
Regardless of what might have happened your supporting laws that punish for what might have happened. Your quickly get into thoughtcrime. Requiring that you need an aggrieved party makes far more sense.
Any crime that does not involve anybody else is bullshit. Drunk driving is stupid but should not be a crime until you damage something that is not yours or somehow impact another.
FAA calls anything under 500ft my yard, you send something into my yard it's now mine and I'm free to do with it as I please. Point being if your looking into an enclosed yard you're a peeping tom whether you're physically there or not.
Franky all they girl had to do was take off her top and the spin would be guy shoots down the drone shooting kiddyporn. We could have given him a medal and send the drones owner to jail.
1 By anyone meaning all comers pay a fee (12c a pole a year around me last I checked), install by certified linemen.
2 You keep saying conduit, it realy does not work well for last mile. It's more expensive and you can still only run one cable. Direct burial cable and tunnels are the general used options. Tunnels give you the flexibility but are great initial expense and upkeep.
3 Your limited to a 2d layout for buried cable, if you stack things you can not maintain them in any reasonable manner. So you're limited to the width of the right of way minus the existing gas, electric, water, sewer, and drainage. Poles are basically a 2d arrangement as well, it also has separation zones between power and anything else for safety. Aesthetics the current 4 ish wires is bad enough image them with 10, 20, 50 or more you have multiple feet wide of cable mess (and yes few places would have that many due to build out costs).
Running it better is combining it all, copper plant is on it's way out with good reason and it's replacement is fiber. Deregulation is not going to make a 3rd or 4th provider go through the massive expense to build out a last mile plant in all but a few high density area's.
You keep pushing for muni's to put lots of conduit so a provider can pull cable, what advantage does that have over a CWDM/DWDM channel(s) per end user per provider? As I said cheap optics gets you 8 channels per end user each can do 10gbps today for 80gbps, more expensive gear can get that to 2.4tbps and can do so on a case by case basis. A single plant means the build out costs for a provider goes from millions tends of millions etc to a fairly manageable 5-6 figures. That means more providers even in secondary markets, competition drives down prices and meta providers can drive efficiency. I can see no advantage is requiring providers build out a last mile plant, your not gaining redundancy as they will share the same rights of way. They need not even put gear in the CO as a fiber trunk to a place of their choosing is still easily within the light budget. History shows that forcing providers to resell their last mile is not effective (DSL).
A single fiber plant also allows muni's to build their own networks. IPv6 makes multiple networks simple since it has support for multiple addresses/prefixes and a closest match selection algorithm so you can have a ISP and still go direct for muni services. VoIP 911 services, access to town/school websites etc, and a baseline local connectivity can become powerful tools and shake up markets. Business can gain access to cheap interconnects. That means a netflix could throw a video server onto a muni network where it makes sense, Local providers can do PBX, backup, cctv monitoring and a host of other services that can be problematic to unfeasible due to bandwidth or lack thereof.
As I said you have apparently never been to a country that lets anything go up on a pole. Very soon they become unmanageable, wires start blocking out the view ruining common space. Burying them runs out even faster as good building practices have pretty wide exclusions zones between pipes.
Muni fiber is the middle ground everybody can compete offer whatever they want without ruining the commons. It's little different than forcing everybody to use the same poles or would you advocate every provider has to install there own and can work out sharing arrangements amongst themselves? So yes it's in the communities best interest to limit the exploitation of the commons while not constraining innovation. Nothing says anybody has be be required to use the fiber but outside of incumbents you have no advantage not to.
The problem is the last mile is a natural monopoly of sorts. If you have been to other countries you will often see telephone poles thick with wires from many companies. Abandoned wires from defunct companies, companies "accidently" damaging other cables, and generally a giant mess. That is the effect of a completely deregulated last mile.
A single fiber plant is that middle ground. For it to be fair everybody has to pay the same per wavelength and those proceeds have to go solely to maintaining/paying for the plant. Plenty of ways to structure that so it's not a potential hidden tax or discriminatory to a specific provider. An all optical plant means any company can put pretty much whatever tech they want, the last mile plant has nothing smart hell nothing that even needs power. Fiber from the 70's would serve just as well as fiber from today with no breakthroughs that look to change that basic fact. 80gbps is today's cheap bandwidth on a given pair (8x 10gbps) and 2.4tbps (24x 100gbps) with purely passive optics in the last mile.
A pipe per provider is self limiting as for each provider you need yet another pipe. A tunnel might fit the bill with similar issues to poles and is massively expensive up front. A single plant reduced the friction of a new provider to servicing the area. More providers means more competition. It also lends itself to meta providers to provide the rest of the infrastructure and backhaul (similar to today's DSL resellers just hopefully less broken).
You're missing the point one pair to the CO per residence/office/building should suffice now and long into the future. Having the muni own the last mile let's providers enter a market without a massive build out. That increases competition which is good for the consumers.
Companies wasting space happens, it's an issue now in shared settings. You have at least a short term advantage to consume everything available so that your competitor has a longer build out time etc etc.
Why ipe in the ground fiberoptics from the 70's will carry that same 80+ gbps as what you install today. Not quite as far but no real matter.
Pipe have problems they get full, companies will relay the same infrastructure but in gear on poles to make it cheaper and less reliable. It starts to be a competitive advantage to have them full so the next guy can not put his own in place or have to wait. The last mile needs to be unified and firmly under muni control. Once you get to the CO it's trivial to throw a big bundle to your own space and not have to live by the CO rules and have the muni cross patch you in the CO. Now nothing says the muni can not outsource the maintenance etc of the fiber plant either. It simply needs to maintain a even and fair connection to any that care to provide services.
Oh sure companies will complain say they will not serve the market etc etc.
Only 10gbps get a dark fiber run and you can cost effectively get to 80gbps via a cwdm passive mux.
We should be decoupling provider services and the last mile with an all passive all optical last mile. Providers can meet at the CO (or backhaul or pay others to backhaul) and hand off a CDWM channel to the muni. Macsec encryption can keep the muni from sniffing anything. If the muni is smart it rolls out muni access. Throw in IPv6 and it become easy to have a single router send things across the muni next vs their transit provider since using the closest match is a basic ipv6 function. So the muni gets a/32 or whatever thats 4 billion subnets and we can give out 4 billion of those. Now everybody has basic access to public services schools etc. Businesses pay a couple of line fee's to get a leased line in town well less than 100 a month for a 10ge to an expansion office or provider.
VL-Bus predated PCI to market being the way to connect vid cards in the 486 days, PCI come out with the pentiums. SCSI was better and still is better, servers are still using SAS and most SATA devices use the SCSI protocol over the SATA bus. I can not think of a case where parallel ports vs usb was a choice maybe later generation zip drives.
In any event I do not see a whole lot of public wireless charging ports. Starbucks being the big one but they are using the powermat devices.
I have a subscriptions and will still pirate it, i refuse to be beholden to use streaming services players. Wake me when they get their act together and get a functional API so things like plex/xbmc can embed them.
I hope the operator of the drone is charged and convicted, trespass and peeking tom laws seem to fit. Hell if that underage girl was topless get them for kiddie porn.
M.2 is the desktop interface for this, it supports 4 PCI 3.0 lanes at 985 MB/s per lane that is nearly 4GB/s. PCI 4.0 is not to far off and doubles that.
Still want a VoIP desk phone with a Qi charger, bluetooth cellphone and headset connectivity. Something where I could charge my phone, use the better handset/speakerphone of my VoIP phone and a bluetooth headset. A perfect world would also allow multiple phone ringing for inbound calls, some contact sync, and possibly calendar/task sync as well.
It is Qi so most will work it's pretty much the winner. It's only 1080P (ish since it uses AMD's sync protocol). It's a PLS panel so none of the IPS goodness.
Pretty much is a fairly meh monitor with a qi charging puck shoved into the base they are literally a few bucks added to the BOM.
Plenty of people have modded bases, keyboard, desks etc etc etc to add qi charging this is just a cheap gimmick to try and make a meh monitor look cool.
Why should the state be allowed to put such restrictions on permits??? If the fugitive showed up they should arrest him possibly some of the event team for aiding and abetting (though that is a broken law). This is the state restricting speech on public property.
Slashdot Mirror
It's a basic design issue of the it's in the cloud man. To many of these IoT either connect directly to wifi and call home or the bridge box does the same. Vera has it about right the logic is all local with the cloud doing the glue of getting mobile apps etc to work.
Really the IoT needs a two tier design a local controller that is fully functional and reasonably secure devices. That local controller should be expected to be updated and upgraded on a regular basis the devices themselves should not expect the same. The protocols should reflect that simple and well defined. To this end things like zwave have it about right (they could use better over the air security) but a temp sensors is a temp sensor pretty much look at SNMP as the standard for getting useful data over an unreliable network with a standard that lasts for decades.
Waste heat? Heat is generally what they want to produce to make steam to run through turbines to make electricity. Heat can also be used to separate water for H fuel, desalination etc etc etc. Or current designs are wasteful because they do only one thing and throw out a lot of energy. It's mostly a PR and regulation issue people would say the desalinated water could be radioactive and the regulators want to oversee anything even tangentially related to the plants.
The law is not about making a civilized society it's about the bare minimum of required regulations so we can live with each other. The basic premise for any criminal law is would you kill somebody for doing it?
Seatbelt laws are dumb, your logic is that since we have socialized medicine society has the right to police any behavior that would place a burden on that socialized medicine. Extend that out and suddenly you have a reason to police everything by that same standard.
Regardless of what might have happened your supporting laws that punish for what might have happened. Your quickly get into thoughtcrime. Requiring that you need an aggrieved party makes far more sense.
Any crime that does not involve anybody else is bullshit. Drunk driving is stupid but should not be a crime until you damage something that is not yours or somehow impact another.
FAA calls anything under 500ft my yard, you send something into my yard it's now mine and I'm free to do with it as I please. Point being if your looking into an enclosed yard you're a peeping tom whether you're physically there or not.
Franky all they girl had to do was take off her top and the spin would be guy shoots down the drone shooting kiddyporn. We could have given him a medal and send the drones owner to jail.
If they are fiddling with it in my backyard while they are repeatedly trespassing and watching my sunbathing daughter I would break said phone.
If you quit without having a new job lined up you're an idiot (unless you have substantial savings your ok with living on making it a vacation).
Yes there is they are tasty and I am an omnivore they are food.
1 By anyone meaning all comers pay a fee (12c a pole a year around me last I checked), install by certified linemen.
2 You keep saying conduit, it realy does not work well for last mile. It's more expensive and you can still only run one cable. Direct burial cable and tunnels are the general used options. Tunnels give you the flexibility but are great initial expense and upkeep.
3 Your limited to a 2d layout for buried cable, if you stack things you can not maintain them in any reasonable manner. So you're limited to the width of the right of way minus the existing gas, electric, water, sewer, and drainage. Poles are basically a 2d arrangement as well, it also has separation zones between power and anything else for safety. Aesthetics the current 4 ish wires is bad enough image them with 10, 20, 50 or more you have multiple feet wide of cable mess (and yes few places would have that many due to build out costs).
Running it better is combining it all, copper plant is on it's way out with good reason and it's replacement is fiber. Deregulation is not going to make a 3rd or 4th provider go through the massive expense to build out a last mile plant in all but a few high density area's.
You keep pushing for muni's to put lots of conduit so a provider can pull cable, what advantage does that have over a CWDM/DWDM channel(s) per end user per provider? As I said cheap optics gets you 8 channels per end user each can do 10gbps today for 80gbps, more expensive gear can get that to 2.4tbps and can do so on a case by case basis. A single plant means the build out costs for a provider goes from millions tends of millions etc to a fairly manageable 5-6 figures. That means more providers even in secondary markets, competition drives down prices and meta providers can drive efficiency. I can see no advantage is requiring providers build out a last mile plant, your not gaining redundancy as they will share the same rights of way. They need not even put gear in the CO as a fiber trunk to a place of their choosing is still easily within the light budget. History shows that forcing providers to resell their last mile is not effective (DSL).
A single fiber plant also allows muni's to build their own networks. IPv6 makes multiple networks simple since it has support for multiple addresses/prefixes and a closest match selection algorithm so you can have a ISP and still go direct for muni services. VoIP 911 services, access to town/school websites etc, and a baseline local connectivity can become powerful tools and shake up markets. Business can gain access to cheap interconnects. That means a netflix could throw a video server onto a muni network where it makes sense, Local providers can do PBX, backup, cctv monitoring and a host of other services that can be problematic to unfeasible due to bandwidth or lack thereof.
As I said you have apparently never been to a country that lets anything go up on a pole. Very soon they become unmanageable, wires start blocking out the view ruining common space. Burying them runs out even faster as good building practices have pretty wide exclusions zones between pipes.
Muni fiber is the middle ground everybody can compete offer whatever they want without ruining the commons. It's little different than forcing everybody to use the same poles or would you advocate every provider has to install there own and can work out sharing arrangements amongst themselves? So yes it's in the communities best interest to limit the exploitation of the commons while not constraining innovation. Nothing says anybody has be be required to use the fiber but outside of incumbents you have no advantage not to.
The problem is the last mile is a natural monopoly of sorts. If you have been to other countries you will often see telephone poles thick with wires from many companies. Abandoned wires from defunct companies, companies "accidently" damaging other cables, and generally a giant mess. That is the effect of a completely deregulated last mile.
A single fiber plant is that middle ground. For it to be fair everybody has to pay the same per wavelength and those proceeds have to go solely to maintaining/paying for the plant. Plenty of ways to structure that so it's not a potential hidden tax or discriminatory to a specific provider. An all optical plant means any company can put pretty much whatever tech they want, the last mile plant has nothing smart hell nothing that even needs power. Fiber from the 70's would serve just as well as fiber from today with no breakthroughs that look to change that basic fact. 80gbps is today's cheap bandwidth on a given pair (8x 10gbps) and 2.4tbps (24x 100gbps) with purely passive optics in the last mile.
A pipe per provider is self limiting as for each provider you need yet another pipe. A tunnel might fit the bill with similar issues to poles and is massively expensive up front. A single plant reduced the friction of a new provider to servicing the area. More providers means more competition. It also lends itself to meta providers to provide the rest of the infrastructure and backhaul (similar to today's DSL resellers just hopefully less broken).
You're missing the point one pair to the CO per residence/office/building should suffice now and long into the future. Having the muni own the last mile let's providers enter a market without a massive build out. That increases competition which is good for the consumers.
Companies wasting space happens, it's an issue now in shared settings. You have at least a short term advantage to consume everything available so that your competitor has a longer build out time etc etc.
Why ipe in the ground fiberoptics from the 70's will carry that same 80+ gbps as what you install today. Not quite as far but no real matter.
Pipe have problems they get full, companies will relay the same infrastructure but in gear on poles to make it cheaper and less reliable. It starts to be a competitive advantage to have them full so the next guy can not put his own in place or have to wait. The last mile needs to be unified and firmly under muni control. Once you get to the CO it's trivial to throw a big bundle to your own space and not have to live by the CO rules and have the muni cross patch you in the CO. Now nothing says the muni can not outsource the maintenance etc of the fiber plant either. It simply needs to maintain a even and fair connection to any that care to provide services.
Oh sure companies will complain say they will not serve the market etc etc.
Only 10gbps get a dark fiber run and you can cost effectively get to 80gbps via a cwdm passive mux.
We should be decoupling provider services and the last mile with an all passive all optical last mile. Providers can meet at the CO (or backhaul or pay others to backhaul) and hand off a CDWM channel to the muni. Macsec encryption can keep the muni from sniffing anything. If the muni is smart it rolls out muni access. Throw in IPv6 and it become easy to have a single router send things across the muni next vs their transit provider since using the closest match is a basic ipv6 function. So the muni gets a /32 or whatever thats 4 billion subnets and we can give out 4 billion of those. Now everybody has basic access to public services schools etc. Businesses pay a couple of line fee's to get a leased line in town well less than 100 a month for a 10ge to an expansion office or provider.
Open dots it's not wireless rather a contact layout.
http://www.eetimes.com/documen... it pretty clear at this point the only one with any market penetration is Qi.
VL-Bus predated PCI to market being the way to connect vid cards in the 486 days, PCI come out with the pentiums. SCSI was better and still is better, servers are still using SAS and most SATA devices use the SCSI protocol over the SATA bus. I can not think of a case where parallel ports vs usb was a choice maybe later generation zip drives.
In any event I do not see a whole lot of public wireless charging ports. Starbucks being the big one but they are using the powermat devices.
I have a subscriptions and will still pirate it, i refuse to be beholden to use streaming services players. Wake me when they get their act together and get a functional API so things like plex/xbmc can embed them.
I hope the operator of the drone is charged and convicted, trespass and peeking tom laws seem to fit. Hell if that underage girl was topless get them for kiddie porn.
M.2 is the desktop interface for this, it supports 4 PCI 3.0 lanes at 985 MB/s per lane that is nearly 4GB/s. PCI 4.0 is not to far off and doubles that.
Still want a VoIP desk phone with a Qi charger, bluetooth cellphone and headset connectivity. Something where I could charge my phone, use the better handset/speakerphone of my VoIP phone and a bluetooth headset. A perfect world would also allow multiple phone ringing for inbound calls, some contact sync, and possibly calendar/task sync as well.
It is Qi so most will work it's pretty much the winner. It's only 1080P (ish since it uses AMD's sync protocol). It's a PLS panel so none of the IPS goodness.
Pretty much is a fairly meh monitor with a qi charging puck shoved into the base they are literally a few bucks added to the BOM.
Plenty of people have modded bases, keyboard, desks etc etc etc to add qi charging this is just a cheap gimmick to try and make a meh monitor look cool.
Because subsidies turn 10k of PV into 30k, much like when the 7k fed tax credit for hybrids went away the price went down 7k.
Because making PV is a rather nasty business, it pretty much just ships the pollution portion of power generation elsewhere.
The restriction was prior restraint of a particular speaker. Insuring you have adequate security, cleanup insurance etc is fine.
Oh I would say the event people intended to have the cops stop it for the PR value rather than going to the courts in the first place.
Why should the state be allowed to put such restrictions on permits??? If the fugitive showed up they should arrest him possibly some of the event team for aiding and abetting (though that is a broken law). This is the state restricting speech on public property.