Agreed on all your points, although I don't think getting 100% of the sigal power to the receiver is an issue. And maybe wired bandwidth is greater, but if you only need 1 gigabit, who cares if fiber can do terabit speeds?
Sun's research is aimed at supercomputers... getting 1024 processors to all talk to each other. Simultaneously. That's a lot of cross connections, and some heavy duty switching gear. But as long as any two processors can switch to the same frequency, they could communicate. Meaning 512 processors in a 1024 node cluster could be sending, at full speed, to the other 512, simultaneously. At 10 GBit per, that's 5 Terabit speed, in total. With the only limiting factor being the amount of channels available.
Siemens had 1 Gbit wireless in 2004. University of Essex had 10 Gbit wireless in 2005. And remember... it's not necessarily the speed that really matters, but the ability to easily mesh together hundreds or thousands of processors.
I'm boggling at the number of scientists. 300? Just what sorts of new and phenomenal information are the rovers sending back that 300 people are needed to run them? I cannot imagine why they'd need 300 people. Best guess I'm making is 45 or 55 people, depending on if they have some people dedicated to one rover or another.
Remember the article not long ago about micro transmitters/receivers on a chip?
Considering no special connections are needed for wireless, unlike light which woud likely need fiber or line of sight, chips equipped with that mini wireless tech would, in theory, only need to be powered and placed in proximity to each other.
Not as sexy as SPARCs with friggin' lasers, but certainly a plus from a computer design perspective.
leaving nowhere near enough matter (or anti-matter) to form galaxies or stars
Actually, matter + antimatter = energy. Energy, if it's 'dense' enough (like what they're trying to accomplish in the LHC), will 'condense' to form matter or antimatter.
All that's needed is a very slight tendency toward that condensation to be biased for a universe full of one or the other after a big bang.
Think about the scenario: Matter and antimatter start 'condensing' out of the early big bang. The newly formed particles collide and turn each other back into energy, which then re-condenses. If there was even a slight tendency toward matter, then through all the matter->energy->matter->energy->matter cycles, matter would tend to accumulate, while antimatter would become increasingly rare.
Or to put it slightly differently, 100% energy -> (51% matter + 49% antimatter) -> 2% matter + 98% energy -> 3.98% matter + 96.02% energy, etc. Any antimatter formed would wind up back as energy only to 're-condense' with a greater chance at being matter, again and again.
The 'flaw' might not even be needed. If it could be shown that the presence of matter near a high concentration of energy would affect the condensation of that energy in such a way as to bias it toward condensing into matter, as opposed to antimatter, that too would explain the preponderance of matter in the universe. The LHC might provide insights into this possibility, too.
Slightly O.T., but can I petition for a reusable "seeyouinfiveyears" tag that gets tacked onto any article where the technology will be out of the lab and in the factory in 'five years'?
Because 5 years from now, I'd really love to quickly and easily see just how accurate or inaccurate that industry standard five-year prediction really is.
less of the sharing occurs over large distances, instead making requests of nearby clients (geographically).
How about a BitTorrent client that gives preference to peers on the *same ISP*?
Yeah, less hops and all is great, but if an ISP can keep from having to hand off packets to a backbone, they'll save money and perhaps all the hue and cry over P2P will die down some. I'm sure Comcast would rather contract with UUnet to handle half of the current traffic destined for other ISPs than they do now.
Sort of a 'be nice to the ISPs and they'll be nicer to the users' scenario.
I don't think they're using that word the way you think they're using that word. I believe they mean *data* bus, as in PCI. You get the satellite up there, and 'plug in' to the communications network which would provide orbit to ground communications, additional processing power or data storage.
I see a whole bunch of potentially useful, detailed and potentially accurate information that won't show up in a Google or Yahoo! search because it's images. I also eventually see that when it is somehow indexed, and if it's #1 on the list and Wikipedia is #2, I see people choosing Wikipedia because it's *more useable*.
I'm guessing that because of university connect speeds, the time it takes to load a 1 meg page isn't significant. Meanwhile, none of the kids with OLPCs will be using the site.
Poor execution looks to be hobbling yet another great idea.
Well, what did you expect? The keys are displays, and have to weigh a lot more than a plain piece of plastic. Thus need stronger springs to return them to up position, a stronger push to depress them, and stiffer suspension to handle the extra force.
In no way would I expect something like this to be 'comfortable' to type on, no matter who makes it.
Where is this going to come in handy at this price point? Nobody's going to pay upwards of $35 for a glorified USB cable.
This would fit the bill for an idea I had for supercomputer connections. Depending on how it's implemented, a wireless connection 'fabric' between nodes would allow for ad-hoc connections between any two processors, with no central switch needed. While the wireless speed might be slower per processor than something like Infiniband, the potental for 5000 simultaneous full-bandwidth connections all happening at the same time between 10,000 CPUs has possibilities. So now I'm wondering what each chip's frequency range is, how narrow can it tune to reject adjacent channels, how well it performs in 'noisy' environments, and how quickly can it change channels.
Using PEEK and POKE to 'unerase' that Apple II basic program someone erased when they accidentally typed 'NEW'. The skill to determine a modem's connect speed from hearing the negotiation sounds. 'Notching' an old single-sided floppy to be able to make it a double-sided disc. Cleaning and/or aligning the heads on your cassette player. Terminating or crimping coax. Knowing you need to type "DIR/S/AH/ON" without having to DIR/? first. Was 'winding your watch' in the list?
I'd love to see some speculation on what skills you'd expect to be obsoleted by 2029.
Since when does going to a smaller process increase yields?
Always has.
Assume there will be 20 defects on a wafer that will render 19 large chips (out of 100) unusable. Your yield is 81%. Same 20 defects, but affecting 20 small chips (out of 170). Now your yield is 88%, or 150 chips versus 81 chips per wafer.
The number of defect sites per wafer is generally rather constant, thus the more chips you can fit on a wafer, the better the yield.
To that, I can't say much but "The parker got their first, and unless you can establish some kind of fraud (phishing, etc.,), the first person to register is the one who has the right to a domain." Actually, the first to _trademark_ the name has the right to it. So if you really, really, really want that domain back, spend the $550 to trademark the name, then apply for arbitration.
If you install Silverlight, the license is specifically for XP SP2 (see here: http://www.microsoft.com/silverlight/license-Win.aspx). "INSTALLATION AND USE RIGHTS. You may install and use any number of copies of the software only with the browser and operating system software named above." Does that mean when SP3 comes out, your Silverlight license is invalidated?
Can I send 40 different versions of cease and desist letters to the US Copyright office and then sue any law firm that uses one that looks a bit too similar to one of mine?
Is an infringing cease and desist letter still valid?
Is "Copyright Troll" going to be a new buzzphrase?
Methinks this ruling will open up cans of worms the likes of which have never been seen, especially once the model is applied to the hundreds of legal documents that are basically boilerplate versions of each other (think leases, EULAs, credit agreements, and divorce documents for starters).
relevant, orbital rocketry...that can't land at an airport. Nor will passengers survive long in an unpressurized capsule with no life support. Getting there is only half the fun.
Remember the Mercury and Gemini programs? You know, the ones we used to help us learn what it would take to get men to the moon and back, safely? They're taking STEPS, and you're complaining because they aren't jumping right to a space shuttle clone.
SeaLaunch, Orbital Sciences, and SpaceX require extensive launch infrastructure. Tell one of them "There's a runway, let's see you launch in a week", and they couldn't do it.
So is your average bobble head doll manufacturer. And they're just as relevant to improving orbital spaceflight. If you want someone to cheer for, cheer for SpaceX, for Orbital Sciences, for SeaLaunch, for any of the private companies involved in *actual orbital spaceflight*.
You forgot one very important word: *Manned* spaceflight.
SpaceX might have launched, but not a manned mission, yet. Virgin Galactic in that regard is quite a ways ahead.
Yes, it's the gas that causes it, which would ordinarily just be a rumble. However, the frequency of the rumble apparently matches one of the harmonics of the rocket casing or motor, which causes a nasty bit of positive feedback.
Much like bouncing in the middle of a board. Changing the frequency of the input force means you won't go as high, changing the mass (lighter or heavier person) means the resonant frequency changes, making the board out of something stiffer or less stiff changes the optimum rate of bouncing...etc.
It's a harmonic vibration issue apparently, and these are generally solved quite easily. Adding or removing stiffness, a spiral wrap of an energy dissipating elastomer, isolation mounts, ading or removing mass (or simply moving mass around)... doesn't look like it's a severe issue at this early of the design stage. Someone's just being alarmist.
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed on all your points, although I don't think getting 100% of the sigal power to the receiver is an issue. And maybe wired bandwidth is greater, but if you only need 1 gigabit, who cares if fiber can do terabit speeds?
Sun's research is aimed at supercomputers... getting 1024 processors to all talk to each other. Simultaneously. That's a lot of cross connections, and some heavy duty switching gear. But as long as any two processors can switch to the same frequency, they could communicate. Meaning 512 processors in a 1024 node cluster could be sending, at full speed, to the other 512, simultaneously. At 10 GBit per, that's 5 Terabit speed, in total. With the only limiting factor being the amount of channels available.
Siemens had 1 Gbit wireless in 2004. University of Essex had 10 Gbit wireless in 2005. And remember... it's not necessarily the speed that really matters, but the ability to easily mesh together hundreds or thousands of processors.
I'm boggling at the number of scientists. 300? Just what sorts of new and phenomenal information are the rovers sending back that 300 people are needed to run them? I cannot imagine why they'd need 300 people. Best guess I'm making is 45 or 55 people, depending on if they have some people dedicated to one rover or another.
Remember the article not long ago about micro transmitters/receivers on a chip?
Considering no special connections are needed for wireless, unlike light which woud likely need fiber or line of sight, chips equipped with that mini wireless tech would, in theory, only need to be powered and placed in proximity to each other.
Not as sexy as SPARCs with friggin' lasers, but certainly a plus from a computer design perspective.
leaving nowhere near enough matter (or anti-matter) to form galaxies or stars
Actually, matter + antimatter = energy.
Energy, if it's 'dense' enough (like what they're trying to accomplish in the LHC), will 'condense' to form matter or antimatter.
All that's needed is a very slight tendency toward that condensation to be biased for a universe full of one or the other after a big bang.
Think about the scenario:
Matter and antimatter start 'condensing' out of the early big bang. The newly formed particles collide and turn each other back into energy, which then re-condenses. If there was even a slight tendency toward matter, then through all the matter->energy->matter->energy->matter cycles, matter would tend to accumulate, while antimatter would become increasingly rare.
Or to put it slightly differently, 100% energy -> (51% matter + 49% antimatter) -> 2% matter + 98% energy -> 3.98% matter + 96.02% energy, etc. Any antimatter formed would wind up back as energy only to 're-condense' with a greater chance at being matter, again and again.
The 'flaw' might not even be needed. If it could be shown that the presence of matter near a high concentration of energy would affect the condensation of that energy in such a way as to bias it toward condensing into matter, as opposed to antimatter, that too would explain the preponderance of matter in the universe. The LHC might provide insights into this possibility, too.
Slightly O.T., but can I petition for a reusable "seeyouinfiveyears" tag that gets tacked onto any article where the technology will be out of the lab and in the factory in 'five years'?
Because 5 years from now, I'd really love to quickly and easily see just how accurate or inaccurate that industry standard five-year prediction really is.
It gets worse. From RTFA:
"Using the P4P protocol, those same files took an average of 0.89 hops"
How do you possibly get an average of LESS than one hop, unless you're getting the file from yourself?
less of the sharing occurs over large distances, instead making requests of nearby clients (geographically).
How about a BitTorrent client that gives preference to peers on the *same ISP*?
Yeah, less hops and all is great, but if an ISP can keep from having to hand off packets to a backbone, they'll save money and perhaps all the hue and cry over P2P will die down some. I'm sure Comcast would rather contract with UUnet to handle half of the current traffic destined for other ISPs than they do now.
Sort of a 'be nice to the ISPs and they'll be nicer to the users' scenario.
I don't think they're using that word the way you think they're using that word. I believe they mean *data* bus, as in PCI. You get the satellite up there, and 'plug in' to the communications network which would provide orbit to ground communications, additional processing power or data storage.
I see a whole bunch of potentially useful, detailed and potentially accurate information that won't show up in a Google or Yahoo! search because it's images. I also eventually see that when it is somehow indexed, and if it's #1 on the list and Wikipedia is #2, I see people choosing Wikipedia because it's *more useable*.
I'm guessing that because of university connect speeds, the time it takes to load a 1 meg page isn't significant. Meanwhile, none of the kids with OLPCs will be using the site.
Poor execution looks to be hobbling yet another great idea.
Same mistake I'm occasionally still guilty of, which is leaving a trailing slash on the URL, probably because of the example code in the post screen.
Try it without the slash:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_Gateway_Protocol
Well, what did you expect? The keys are displays, and have to weigh a lot more than a plain piece of plastic. Thus need stronger springs to return them to up position, a stronger push to depress them, and stiffer suspension to handle the extra force.
In no way would I expect something like this to be 'comfortable' to type on, no matter who makes it.
Where is this going to come in handy at this price point? Nobody's going to pay upwards of $35 for a glorified USB cable.
This would fit the bill for an idea I had for supercomputer connections. Depending on how it's implemented, a wireless connection 'fabric' between nodes would allow for ad-hoc connections between any two processors, with no central switch needed. While the wireless speed might be slower per processor than something like Infiniband, the potental for 5000 simultaneous full-bandwidth connections all happening at the same time between 10,000 CPUs has possibilities. So now I'm wondering what each chip's frequency range is, how narrow can it tune to reject adjacent channels, how well it performs in 'noisy' environments, and how quickly can it change channels.
Using PEEK and POKE to 'unerase' that Apple II basic program someone erased when they accidentally typed 'NEW'. /S /AH /ON" without having to DIR /? first.
The skill to determine a modem's connect speed from hearing the negotiation sounds.
'Notching' an old single-sided floppy to be able to make it a double-sided disc.
Cleaning and/or aligning the heads on your cassette player.
Terminating or crimping coax.
Knowing you need to type "DIR
Was 'winding your watch' in the list?
I'd love to see some speculation on what skills you'd expect to be obsoleted by 2029.
Since when does going to a smaller process increase yields?
Always has.
Assume there will be 20 defects on a wafer that will render 19 large chips (out of 100) unusable. Your yield is 81%.
Same 20 defects, but affecting 20 small chips (out of 170). Now your yield is 88%, or 150 chips versus 81 chips per wafer.
The number of defect sites per wafer is generally rather constant, thus the more chips you can fit on a wafer, the better the yield.
Well looks like ICANN finally got fed up and have given the ball a small push
Actually, it's the other way around. Everyone has been fed up with ICANN because they've been dragging their feet on getting this done.
Gloom Wing Moth
Phew!
Stop playing with the timestream folks, our universe was almost pinched off in a temporal loop.
Another funny...
If you install Silverlight, the license is specifically for XP SP2 (see here: http://www.microsoft.com/silverlight/license-Win.aspx). "INSTALLATION AND USE RIGHTS. You may install and use any number of copies of the software only with the browser and operating system software named above." Does that mean when SP3 comes out, your Silverlight license is invalidated?
So does this sword cut two ways?
Can I send 40 different versions of cease and desist letters to the US Copyright office and then sue any law firm that uses one that looks a bit too similar to one of mine?
Is an infringing cease and desist letter still valid?
Is "Copyright Troll" going to be a new buzzphrase?
Methinks this ruling will open up cans of worms the likes of which have never been seen, especially once the model is applied to the hundreds of legal documents that are basically boilerplate versions of each other (think leases, EULAs, credit agreements, and divorce documents for starters).
relevant, orbital rocketry ...that can't land at an airport. Nor will passengers survive long in an unpressurized capsule with no life support. Getting there is only half the fun.
Remember the Mercury and Gemini programs? You know, the ones we used to help us learn what it would take to get men to the moon and back, safely? They're taking STEPS, and you're complaining because they aren't jumping right to a space shuttle clone.
SeaLaunch, Orbital Sciences, and SpaceX require extensive launch infrastructure. Tell one of them "There's a runway, let's see you launch in a week", and they couldn't do it.
So is your average bobble head doll manufacturer. And they're just as relevant to improving orbital spaceflight. If you want someone to cheer for, cheer for SpaceX, for Orbital Sciences, for SeaLaunch, for any of the private companies involved in *actual orbital spaceflight*.
You forgot one very important word:
*Manned* spaceflight.
SpaceX might have launched, but not a manned mission, yet. Virgin Galactic in that regard is quite a ways ahead.
So... what if someone else stuck a TM after Cyberlaw?
...and seems the term has been leveraged before, in court:
Like this:
http://www.swcp.com/~zialink/patent.htm
or this...
http://www.sjgames.com/SS/cyberlaw.html
http://www.oss.net/dynamaster/file_archive/040320/c378876cc036a94572ec64d1b6f1258f/OSS1993-01-29.pdf
Yes, it's the gas that causes it, which would ordinarily just be a rumble. However, the frequency of the rumble apparently matches one of the harmonics of the rocket casing or motor, which causes a nasty bit of positive feedback.
Much like bouncing in the middle of a board. Changing the frequency of the input force means you won't go as high, changing the mass (lighter or heavier person) means the resonant frequency changes, making the board out of something stiffer or less stiff changes the optimum rate of bouncing...etc.
It's a harmonic vibration issue apparently, and these are generally solved quite easily. Adding or removing stiffness, a spiral wrap of an energy dissipating elastomer, isolation mounts, ading or removing mass (or simply moving mass around)... doesn't look like it's a severe issue at this early of the design stage. Someone's just being alarmist.
Do dictionary entries count?
:-)
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cyberlaw
Maybe we can add his picture to TWO definitions