As far as I know, nobody has a 10G phy at 14nm at this time. Intels current 10G ethernet PHYs come from Aquantia: http://www.lestina.com/media/p...
Their current offering is still at 28nm. None of the *very very few* 10G ethernet phy competitors have anything close.
It would have to be a mystery company they were getting this IP from, especially considering the 2.5G Ethernet rate support. Only Aquantia and Broadcom support this right now.
If you think a $10k piece of Jewelry is an investment, unless you plan on melting down the gold when prices are high or it's a collectors, then you are most likely not the type of person that could afford one. The friendly man behind the counter at the pawn shop can help explain the intricacies of jewelry pricing to you, and laugh when you claim "but I paid xxx!!!".
What's the point of a Rolex? They're absolutely obsolete, unless you're going for some strange fashion statement involving sporadic announcements of "it's a Rolex". If you are rich, then it'll be impressive as a pair of blue jeans for the rest of us. But, if you want a modern smart watch that you can dress up with, where the Rolex used to go, then you're choices are limited to exactly one. There's an absolute gaping void in the market that they're putting *something* into. What's the problem with that? Why does that involve a "soul"?
Bluetooth was horribly implemented by most devices and use cases. 8 device limit (although, I've rarely seen anything that supports pairing with more than one), wasn't really usable as a data connection for iPhone since that required jumping through certifications hoops, many Android implementations were broken, and not much that has Bluetooth goes beyond audio.
It could have been cool, but broken software stacks meant that nothing but the most basic profiles worked reliably and making something interesting meant it wouldn't work in the field. This whole iBeacon thing being anything but trivial makes me shutter at the lack of creativity for Bluetooth devices in the last decade.
From the summary: > and two integrated 10 Gigabit Ethernet ports
The article doesn't say that they're integrated, just the summary. Maybe the mac is internal, but the phy (the power hungry part of ethernet) will be a separate chip. There's no way they stuck it in the cpu, 10G phy silicon is huge and heatsinky.
Who knows if they they included the phy power in the 45 Watts.
Then write to your politician to not be so corrupt and uphold all of the existing laws. A consumer buying the lesser product just to prevent a monopoly is totally absurd.
It's been interesting watching the beast slowly awaken from ARM poking at it so much. I hope we get some great mobile chips out of this.
Maybe 2015 will be the year of the well hidden don't-hold-it-that-way type heat sinks, along with thicker phones for bigger batteries, so we can actually use these things. Function has to creep back into fashion at some point.
Blowin my mind here. I wonder if this Uncanny Valley problems manifests itself in our society as a whole. I suppose if you wanted to get philosophical, you could say that cultural resistance for change and introduction of new things is an Uncanny Valley problem.
I never thought of the "Uncanny Valley" like this before. I was going to respond saying it might be the less technical not understanding the difficulties of implementing realism, resulting in a mindset of "but it can't do this!" rather than "look what this can do!"...but that's basically the Uncanny Valley problem in this context, the expectation of realism increases as you approach realistic.
But how is this legal? Seems to me a truly public company wouldn't be able to limit the shares bought by any entity. I always assume public meant anyone could buy into the company...the more money you put in, the more of the company you own.
I realize that. I just find it interesting that if you changed a few sentences in the instruction manual, there would be, literally, no difference between the two.
The paper debunks that the shape has anything to do with magic and clearly states the shape, on it's own, does nothing in the first few paragraphs. Even with the increased length for part of the revolution, I assume if you integrate over the whole downward push, for both, you would get the same numbers.
I don't get it. There were no numbers posted in the thread. This doesn't mean placebo, this just means there are no numbers posted. The claim that it's placebo has just as much foundation that it's not. Write a benchmark and test it, you could get exactly 2 minutes of fame.
> have to do more work in order to do a single revolution.
It's inertia. It's not wasted. It'll create a force when the pedal decelerates. Since you always want the pedal spinning, this isn't so bad for cruising. It's only bad for transients, which this would help smooth out.
> related to pedals having 2 moments of inertial. Would be no different than a straight pedal with more mass on the end.
Claims that the benefit is from two side effects of the claim:
The increased mass gives a flywheel effect, meaning the pedal goes through top dead center easier.
The long shape bends under pressure, which does slightly increase the length of the arm under pressure.
So, by going to carbon fiber (lighter, and most likely stiffer), they'll most likely negate any benefits!
> so the cyclist's legs are in a different position during the pedal cycle Only because of the bending. If it were stiffer, position would be exactly the same.
Slashdot Mirror
As far as I know, nobody has a 10G phy at 14nm at this time. Intels current 10G ethernet PHYs come from Aquantia: http://www.lestina.com/media/p...
Their current offering is still at 28nm. None of the *very very few* 10G ethernet phy competitors have anything close.
It would have to be a mystery company they were getting this IP from, especially considering the 2.5G Ethernet rate support. Only Aquantia and Broadcom support this right now.
If you think a $10k piece of Jewelry is an investment, unless you plan on melting down the gold when prices are high or it's a collectors, then you are most likely not the type of person that could afford one. The friendly man behind the counter at the pawn shop can help explain the intricacies of jewelry pricing to you, and laugh when you claim "but I paid xxx!!!".
What's the point of a Rolex? They're absolutely obsolete, unless you're going for some strange fashion statement involving sporadic announcements of "it's a Rolex". If you are rich, then it'll be impressive as a pair of blue jeans for the rest of us. But, if you want a modern smart watch that you can dress up with, where the Rolex used to go, then you're choices are limited to exactly one. There's an absolute gaping void in the market that they're putting *something* into. What's the problem with that? Why does that involve a "soul"?
Bluetooth was horribly implemented by most devices and use cases. 8 device limit (although, I've rarely seen anything that supports pairing with more than one), wasn't really usable as a data connection for iPhone since that required jumping through certifications hoops, many Android implementations were broken, and not much that has Bluetooth goes beyond audio.
It could have been cool, but broken software stacks meant that nothing but the most basic profiles worked reliably and making something interesting meant it wouldn't work in the field. This whole iBeacon thing being anything but trivial makes me shutter at the lack of creativity for Bluetooth devices in the last decade.
Maybe things will get better with 4.1.
From the summary:
> and two integrated 10 Gigabit Ethernet ports
The article doesn't say that they're integrated, just the summary. Maybe the mac is internal, but the phy (the power hungry part of ethernet) will be a separate chip. There's no way they stuck it in the cpu, 10G phy silicon is huge and heatsinky.
Who knows if they they included the phy power in the 45 Watts.
Then write to your politician to not be so corrupt and uphold all of the existing laws. A consumer buying the lesser product just to prevent a monopoly is totally absurd.
It's been interesting watching the beast slowly awaken from ARM poking at it so much. I hope we get some great mobile chips out of this.
Maybe 2015 will be the year of the well hidden don't-hold-it-that-way type heat sinks, along with thicker phones for bigger batteries, so we can actually use these things. Function has to creep back into fashion at some point.
You're lucky. I'm have one option (comcast in silicon valley) of $79 for 20meg down/1meg up.
We can *just* do hd streaming for amazon/netflix videos. Some nights, it's too slow and we buffer every once and a while.
I have no mod points, so take this comment instead.
Slashdot, your comment rating system is shit.
And, once these multi rate gigabit get cheaper, cat5e should be good up to 5gig at 100m, 10G short run. :D
Blowin my mind here. I wonder if this Uncanny Valley problems manifests itself in our society as a whole. I suppose if you wanted to get philosophical, you could say that cultural resistance for change and introduction of new things is an Uncanny Valley problem.
I never thought of the "Uncanny Valley" like this before. I was going to respond saying it might be the less technical not understanding the difficulties of implementing realism, resulting in a mindset of "but it can't do this!" rather than "look what this can do!"...but that's basically the Uncanny Valley problem in this context, the expectation of realism increases as you approach realistic.
"different proprietary formats of video from security cameras"
Since when are iPhone and Android devices considered security cameras?
But how is this legal? Seems to me a truly public company wouldn't be able to limit the shares bought by any entity. I always assume public meant anyone could buy into the company...the more money you put in, the more of the company you own.
I realize that. I just find it interesting that if you changed a few sentences in the instruction manual, there would be, literally, no difference between the two.
I'm confused. Isn't the movement of a limited resource the definition of an economy and the foundation of currency? How is this any different?
Genuinely curious...
How long did this take you to start making a reasonable income?
Maybe being invisible is a good thing, especially when you could try to reflect/douse the area in water if you saw where it was hitting.
You'd think all of this would be illegal under The United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons.
I imagine everyone on board will be blinded. I also imagine blinding a whole crowd of spectators would only take one piece of shiny metal.
This doesn't give full tracking, only gestures.
Since when is Core i5, Intel HD 4000, and 4GB of ram, and a screen with an absurdly high resolution, considered a netbook?
Sure, it has a netbook os installed...but that doesn't mean anything. I could also install windows 3.1...big deal.
The paper debunks that the shape has anything to do with magic and clearly states the shape, on it's own, does nothing in the first few paragraphs. Even with the increased length for part of the revolution, I assume if you integrate over the whole downward push, for both, you would get the same numbers.
You didn't read the paper.
I don't get it. There were no numbers posted in the thread. This doesn't mean placebo, this just means there are no numbers posted. The claim that it's placebo has just as much foundation that it's not. Write a benchmark and test it, you could get exactly 2 minutes of fame.
> have to do more work in order to do a single revolution.
It's inertia. It's not wasted. It'll create a force when the pedal decelerates. Since you always want the pedal spinning, this isn't so bad for cruising. It's only bad for transients, which this would help smooth out.
> related to pedals having 2 moments of inertial.
Would be no different than a straight pedal with more mass on the end.
An analysis, found on their webpage:
http://www.z-torque.com/Portals/6/DrHuangReport.pdf
Claims that the benefit is from two side effects of the claim:
The increased mass gives a flywheel effect, meaning the pedal goes through top dead center easier.
The long shape bends under pressure, which does slightly increase the length of the arm under pressure.
So, by going to carbon fiber (lighter, and most likely stiffer), they'll most likely negate any benefits!
> so the cyclist's legs are in a different position during the pedal cycle
Only because of the bending. If it were stiffer, position would be exactly the same.