1) Jimmy's girlfriend goes to the girls restroom/gym with his ID. 2) System notes that Jimmy's in the girls restroom/gym. 3) Jimmy gets permanently listed as a sex offender.
Patents may be monopolies, but how about the alternative? Companies may spend months or years and tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars to come up with some new way of doing something. Without patent protection, other companies could then quickly copy the invention, spending a fraction of the time and money, with just a small lag in time to market. What incentive would companies have to innovate? Patents, done right, should protect the inventors at least long enough for them to make back their investment in time and money, giving them the incentive to keep innovating.
I understand that winglets don't eliminate vortexes, just like surfing the vortexes won't come close to extracting all of the energy in them to reduce fuel use in trailing aircraft. I'm just thinking that winglets may improve the fuel efficiency of the aircraft as much or more than surfing does, at least for similar sized aircraft. If the aircraft have winglets, how much does that decrease the gains of surfing? I'm guessing that the air force is looking at that, but the article doesn't mention winglets at all.
Why don't they just install winglets like the airlines are doing? Winglets reduce fuel usage by minimizing the drag associated with the creation of the vortexes. You get the benefits, even if just one plane is flying.
In some parts of the law, the knowing party HAS to disclose to the unknowing party, even if the unknowing party doesn't ask. I can't say that that's the case in jury selection, but I'd be surprised if it wasn't. So yes, he could very well have misrepresented.
Just as I remembered, NASA lands capsules in the water because that doesn't require braking rockets to slow down just before landing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splashdown_(spacecraft_landing) Water landing allows cancellation of final velocity in a few feet rather than a few inches. At a few MPH, water isn't as hard as terra firma. And there usually aren't many icebergs around, nor other issues, regardless of Gus Grissom's experience.
No, your problem is believing that patents are vaguer than they actually are.
I've looked at the patent. http://www.google.com/patents/USD593087 Vague is probably the wrong word. Too broad is more accurate. 1) Apple claimed that Samsung violated this patent. 2) Looking at the patent drawings versus the supposed infringing models, I'd say that I can certainly tell them apart. 3) So exactly how close, or conversely, how far away from those drawings do I need to be to avoid a claim of infringement? Are confused consumers the measurement, as Apple suggested? Is one out of one million over the line? If not, how many?
It's true that the phrase "a rectangle with rounder corners" is a bit inflammatory, but that doesn't excuse the patent office granting overly broad patents.
Not the point here: The design patent in this case is just too vague, and never should have been granted in the first place, per my previous comment.
And yes it is part of Apple's "you copied too closely" law suit, so if the rectangle fits... Samsung certainly did copy some of the icons way too closely, but does the shape of the phone count? In the trial, Apple argued that the Samsung phones could confuse buyers. Does the "shape" of the phone do that? No. Does the shape + home screen icons make it confusing? I'd say no, but admittedly grandma buying a phone for a grand kid could be talked into buying the Samsung if the salesman says "it's Samsung's version of the iPhone."
BTW, I should mention that my family is heavily invested in Apple products, and only have a few Android devices. So don't lump me into the "Android fan" group you seem to have a problem with. I have a problem with patents that are too vague being granted, then used to stifle competition.
The OP may be seeking overkill. The hearing aid should always, as you pointed out, be tuned for your specific condition. Here's a link to an article about some non-script amplifiers (can't call them hearing aids if they aren't prescribed): http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443921504577643451266751104.html There are some out there that let you tune to your condition, but don't use BT or apps to do it.
That's why audiophiles prefer vinyl, because it captures more sound from the studio recording. Pono is a try to capture like 100% of what the musician get on the studio tapes.
Not trying to post flamebait, but [citation needed]. Vinyl has its own limitations, and I keep hearing people claim that it's "better" than CD. Vinyl has limits on SN, noise floor, channel separation, frequency response and dynamic range, just like any other playback medium. Mechanical limitations of the mastering process has its own set of problems. Of course, Pono is going to be better than CD, all else being equal.
It reminds me of the old "tubes are better than transistor amps" argument. A common comment is that the sound from a tube amp is "warmer." Just because something sounds "better" to you doesn't mean that it's a more accurate reproduction of the original sound. CDs and vinyl are both limited in their accuracy of reproduction, and which one is better really depends upon your definition of "better" and the specs you feel are most important.
Those sci-fi gadgets could be construed to show that, once the technology is there, someone schooled in the art would likely use that type of form-factor though.
If you are trying to add a display to a phone screen and want to make the maximum amount of screen data visible, you're going to quickly evolve to a phone where that screen dominates one side of the device. Likewise, you are going to design the microphone and speaker so that they are as reasonably far apart as possible. The vagueness of Apple's infamous "rectangle with rounded corners" could make it difficult to avoid infringing while still doing something pretty obvious, give the design constraints.
The point is, the solder balls actually are a really good conductor of heat, as are the interconnects that they join. You can't change the basic thermal properties of a material just because you are not intending to use those properties. Just because our first intuition is that the air gap is going to drive the overall thermal conductivity of the package doesn't make it so. Just like I, along with others, thought that the epoxy in the modules I worked with would act more as an insulator rather than the pretty good heat conductor that it turned out to be.
I'm sure that Amcor and other assembly manufacturers have characterized the thermal conductivity of stacked assemblies like these, but I haven't found any data for them to verify this.
Running some tests using the on-cpu thermal register data, with and without a heat sink, would of course answer this question. I, for one, intend to add a heat sink if I end up overclocking the cpu.
The turbo mode was generally intended to be used if you didn't want the faster speed, e.g. when running programs that depended upon the cpu to be running at the IBM "standard" frequency and had hard-coded loops for timing control. Running a faster cpu frequency could make those programs unusable.
If you didn't notice any difference in speed on your machine, it could be that some bios setting was overriding the turbo button setting.
You can heatsink them. The question is, would it do any good? The answer is; yes, probably. The thermal conductivity between the memory and cpu die should be pretty good. As a comparison, I worked at a company that made some modules that consisted of a memory IC and some other devices, all contained within an epoxy-filled module. I ran some ja and jc tests, thinking that the epoxy would act as an insulator and increase the values over the memory IC by itself. It turned out that the numbers were lower. The epoxy acted as a fairly good thermal conductor and, because of the greater surface area of the module, it ended up working as a pretty good heatsink. In this case you've got interconnects between the two die that should have much better thermal conductivity than the epoxy in those modules.
Certainly you won't get results as good as you could attaching a heatsink directly above the cpu, but I'd still expect a measurable improvement.
My bad, did some research after posting and found this: http://www.agbioforum.org/v12n34/v12n34a10-duke.htm Apparently there are a lot of products that have been on the market for some time and are commonly grown in NA.
"If the effects are as big as purported, and if the work really is relevant to humans, why aren't the North Americans dropping like flies? GM has been in the food chain for over a decade over there - and longevity continues to increase inexorably," he said in an emailed comment.
True, but Roundup resistant GM maize contaminated with Roundup has not been in the food chain for long--AFAIK. How long some GMs have been in the food chain is irrelevant to this discussion.
Yes, I wish we could just nuke the entire stupid Embedded-URL QR code thread here. OTOH, exactly what good is this QR code anyway? If it's a serial number, what's to keep counterfeiters from copying an existing QR code onto their bills? If there are 1K $100 bills out there with the same QR code "serial number," how do you prove which one is real? How do you even know that there's more than one, albeit one that's moving around the country really fast? Would it really take that long for counterfeiters to develop the technology to print those codes? Or am I missing something?
Slashdot Mirror
In my fairly rural high school nearly a decade ago the principal had (hidden!) cameras in the bathrooms...
FTFY
1) Jimmy's girlfriend goes to the girls restroom/gym with his ID. 2) System notes that Jimmy's in the girls restroom/gym. 3) Jimmy gets permanently listed as a sex offender.
The newbies, of course, will have to check wikipedia to find out about octal. Dang kids!
Patents may be monopolies, but how about the alternative? Companies may spend months or years and tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars to come up with some new way of doing something. Without patent protection, other companies could then quickly copy the invention, spending a fraction of the time and money, with just a small lag in time to market. What incentive would companies have to innovate? Patents, done right, should protect the inventors at least long enough for them to make back their investment in time and money, giving them the incentive to keep innovating.
I understand that winglets don't eliminate vortexes, just like surfing the vortexes won't come close to extracting all of the energy in them to reduce fuel use in trailing aircraft. I'm just thinking that winglets may improve the fuel efficiency of the aircraft as much or more than surfing does, at least for similar sized aircraft. If the aircraft have winglets, how much does that decrease the gains of surfing? I'm guessing that the air force is looking at that, but the article doesn't mention winglets at all.
Why don't they just install winglets like the airlines are doing? Winglets reduce fuel usage by minimizing the drag associated with the creation of the vortexes. You get the benefits, even if just one plane is flying.
The UA 571-C Sentry Gun from Aliens would probably work.
In some parts of the law, the knowing party HAS to disclose to the unknowing party, even if the unknowing party doesn't ask. I can't say that that's the case in jury selection, but I'd be surprised if it wasn't. So yes, he could very well have misrepresented.
Just as I remembered, NASA lands capsules in the water because that doesn't require braking rockets to slow down just before landing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splashdown_(spacecraft_landing) Water landing allows cancellation of final velocity in a few feet rather than a few inches. At a few MPH, water isn't as hard as terra firma. And there usually aren't many icebergs around, nor other issues, regardless of Gus Grissom's experience.
No, your problem is believing that patents are vaguer than they actually are.
I've looked at the patent. http://www.google.com/patents/USD593087 Vague is probably the wrong word. Too broad is more accurate. 1) Apple claimed that Samsung violated this patent. 2) Looking at the patent drawings versus the supposed infringing models, I'd say that I can certainly tell them apart. 3) So exactly how close, or conversely, how far away from those drawings do I need to be to avoid a claim of infringement? Are confused consumers the measurement, as Apple suggested? Is one out of one million over the line? If not, how many?
It's true that the phrase "a rectangle with rounder corners" is a bit inflammatory, but that doesn't excuse the patent office granting overly broad patents.
Depends upon whether or not the asteroid's gravitational field is stronger than external forces, such as photons, solar wind.
Not the point here: The design patent in this case is just too vague, and never should have been granted in the first place, per my previous comment.
And yes it is part of Apple's "you copied too closely" law suit, so if the rectangle fits... Samsung certainly did copy some of the icons way too closely, but does the shape of the phone count? In the trial, Apple argued that the Samsung phones could confuse buyers. Does the "shape" of the phone do that? No. Does the shape + home screen icons make it confusing? I'd say no, but admittedly grandma buying a phone for a grand kid could be talked into buying the Samsung if the salesman says "it's Samsung's version of the iPhone."
BTW, I should mention that my family is heavily invested in Apple products, and only have a few Android devices. So don't lump me into the "Android fan" group you seem to have a problem with. I have a problem with patents that are too vague being granted, then used to stifle competition.
The OP may be seeking overkill. The hearing aid should always, as you pointed out, be tuned for your specific condition. Here's a link to an article about some non-script amplifiers (can't call them hearing aids if they aren't prescribed): http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443921504577643451266751104.html There are some out there that let you tune to your condition, but don't use BT or apps to do it.
Forget VM, Boost Mobile forces the username to be your 10-digit mobile number and the password to a 4-digit number that you select.
That's why audiophiles prefer vinyl, because it captures more sound from the studio recording. Pono is a try to capture like 100% of what the musician get on the studio tapes.
Not trying to post flamebait, but [citation needed]. Vinyl has its own limitations, and I keep hearing people claim that it's "better" than CD. Vinyl has limits on SN, noise floor, channel separation, frequency response and dynamic range, just like any other playback medium. Mechanical limitations of the mastering process has its own set of problems. Of course, Pono is going to be better than CD, all else being equal.
It reminds me of the old "tubes are better than transistor amps" argument. A common comment is that the sound from a tube amp is "warmer." Just because something sounds "better" to you doesn't mean that it's a more accurate reproduction of the original sound. CDs and vinyl are both limited in their accuracy of reproduction, and which one is better really depends upon your definition of "better" and the specs you feel are most important.
Those sci-fi gadgets could be construed to show that, once the technology is there, someone schooled in the art would likely use that type of form-factor though.
If you are trying to add a display to a phone screen and want to make the maximum amount of screen data visible, you're going to quickly evolve to a phone where that screen dominates one side of the device. Likewise, you are going to design the microphone and speaker so that they are as reasonably far apart as possible. The vagueness of Apple's infamous "rectangle with rounded corners" could make it difficult to avoid infringing while still doing something pretty obvious, give the design constraints.
The point is, the solder balls actually are a really good conductor of heat, as are the interconnects that they join. You can't change the basic thermal properties of a material just because you are not intending to use those properties. Just because our first intuition is that the air gap is going to drive the overall thermal conductivity of the package doesn't make it so. Just like I, along with others, thought that the epoxy in the modules I worked with would act more as an insulator rather than the pretty good heat conductor that it turned out to be.
I'm sure that Amcor and other assembly manufacturers have characterized the thermal conductivity of stacked assemblies like these, but I haven't found any data for them to verify this.
Running some tests using the on-cpu thermal register data, with and without a heat sink, would of course answer this question. I, for one, intend to add a heat sink if I end up overclocking the cpu.
Generally, the one who fires the first shot is the attacker and the one who fires second is the defender. Opinion holder-neutral definition.
The turbo mode was generally intended to be used if you didn't want the faster speed, e.g. when running programs that depended upon the cpu to be running at the IBM "standard" frequency and had hard-coded loops for timing control. Running a faster cpu frequency could make those programs unusable.
If you didn't notice any difference in speed on your machine, it could be that some bios setting was overriding the turbo button setting.
You can heatsink them. The question is, would it do any good? The answer is; yes, probably. The thermal conductivity between the memory and cpu die should be pretty good. As a comparison, I worked at a company that made some modules that consisted of a memory IC and some other devices, all contained within an epoxy-filled module. I ran some ja and jc tests, thinking that the epoxy would act as an insulator and increase the values over the memory IC by itself. It turned out that the numbers were lower. The epoxy acted as a fairly good thermal conductor and, because of the greater surface area of the module, it ended up working as a pretty good heatsink. In this case you've got interconnects between the two die that should have much better thermal conductivity than the epoxy in those modules.
Certainly you won't get results as good as you could attaching a heatsink directly above the cpu, but I'd still expect a measurable improvement.
But banning GMs/Round up will lead to Nuclear War! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Policy_debate
My bad, did some research after posting and found this: http://www.agbioforum.org/v12n34/v12n34a10-duke.htm Apparently there are a lot of products that have been on the market for some time and are commonly grown in NA.
"If the effects are as big as purported, and if the work really is relevant to humans, why aren't the North Americans dropping like flies? GM has been in the food chain for over a decade over there - and longevity continues to increase inexorably," he said in an emailed comment.
True, but Roundup resistant GM maize contaminated with Roundup has not been in the food chain for long--AFAIK. How long some GMs have been in the food chain is irrelevant to this discussion.
That's the heat shield dropping away at the start. The video was taken by Mars Descent Imager that was on the bottom of Curiosity. http://msl-scicorner.jpl.nasa.gov/Instruments/MARDI/ The title is accurate.
Yes, I wish we could just nuke the entire stupid Embedded-URL QR code thread here. OTOH, exactly what good is this QR code anyway? If it's a serial number, what's to keep counterfeiters from copying an existing QR code onto their bills? If there are 1K $100 bills out there with the same QR code "serial number," how do you prove which one is real? How do you even know that there's more than one, albeit one that's moving around the country really fast? Would it really take that long for counterfeiters to develop the technology to print those codes? Or am I missing something?