All of the generators must be phase-locked to each other, or you can't put two of them in parallel. So, the timing is very precise and even phase is controlled very tightly. It seems that generators hundreds of miles from each other (if not farther) are often switched onto the same circuit.
There must be speed-of-propogation issues when electric transmission lines of different length are fed. I'd like to hear more about them.
Digital ones that use the 60 Hz power frequency for their timing signal, rather than another oscillator like a quartz crystal.
Mechanical ones powered by the AC line, not a wind-up spring or battery. Pretty much all of those use a synchronous motor that locks itself to the 60Hz AC wave.
The wind-up kind, and any clocks that run exclusively by battery power, won't be effected.
By the way, quartz isn't the only material that can act as an electronic tuning fork. Early electronic clocks actually used mechanical tuning forks. Ceramic resonators are used, rather than quartz, in less precise applications. And piezoelectric crystals (which is what the quartz ones are) can be made of other materials, you can even make them from cream of tartar! Look up
Rochelle Salts.
Well-designed software is beautiful. It can be read and understood easily because it explains itself. It performs correctly, it is easy to change without breaking something, it is quick to develop.
It's far from clear to me that this is something you arrive at using a UML diagram alone. Nor do I believe that UML is necessary for most architects to figure out what to model and how to organize their code. I'd think that a great diagram could easily be followed by a horrible implementation.
But all really good engineering is art. Examples abound in architecture, automotive and aircraft design, and electronics.
If you're not able to appreciate that, I feel sorry about your handicap.
This is what I got out of the "dict" command: v 1: give to understand; "I insinuated that I did not like his
wife" [syn: {adumbrate}, {insinuate}]
2: imply as a possibility; "The evidence suggests a need for
more clarification" [syn: {suggest}]
The E Clampus Vitus members who perpetrated the prank were themselves history professors at Berkeley as well. They had to be history professors because they used correctly archaic writing and language. But the joke was entirely on them. First, someone moved their plaque from Pt. Reyes to Remillard Point by Larkspur Landing, a drive across all of Marin and certainly deliberate IMO - it was placed in another likely place for the ship to land, but where the perpetrators couldn't find it. Then it was found three years later and conveyed to the professor, who believed its veracity. And then the perpetrators couldn't confess to their own fraud. It didn't happen under their control and they (and their victim) would have been disgraced because of all of the news that had gone on about it.
Itanium and Hammer aren't yet suitable for an investment as large as Pixar has just made. The chips and motherboards aren't cost-effective compared to 32-bit, and there's not enough experience with that hardware yet to point out all of the gotchas. Next time. They'll probably do another render farm in a year. They want to get 3 or 4 times their present size - at least in square feet of office space. Crazy as that sounds, if you've seen the present huge campus.
Any one of the copyright holders can sue, or a number of them can band together and sue. We've always won, but the cases have never gotten to court. Their side's attorney concludes that they'd lose the case, and they settle before going to court. They either remove the infringement and apologize, or they place the linked code under a GPL-compatible license. Note that this need not be the GPL, the X license and the LGPL are GPL-compatible, so are a number of other licenses.
Any one of them or a number of them collectively may file suit. All cases have been settled out of court, we've always won - meaning the other party has always removed the infringement, or applied correct terms to their own code.
And when we're done bemoaning what happened to ALPHA, here's another to think about.
Remember the iAPX 432? A message-passing architecture implemented in hardware, with every function living in its own privilege ring. You could do that machine right today. And you wouldn't have to use ADA to do it. Someone should make more new silicon in this direction. IA64 goes a little bit in this direction, but it's too easy for operating systems and compilers to not use its capabilities in the name of portability. With the '432, there was never any possibility of the OS running on anything else.
I used to feel this way... until I bought a Multia. But I agree that all of the hype we're seeing today is about stuff that ALPHA did 10 years ago. It's a damn shame.
I know of a very large US company that makes MRI scanners using Linux.
Regarding your claim that VMS is optimized for Fourier wave analysis, I can't believe that this is unique today. The main impetus behind VAX BSD was ARPA's desire to have a Unix system that would handle the memory demands of computer graphics. We made use of various Unix systems at Pixar and Pixar's predecessors, where there were similar sorts of problems (texture rendering rather than FFT) and Linux is now the darling of those places.
This is a VM and cache issue, not really rocket science these days.
It's not even "ethics" you're talking about. Debian doesn't want to distribute software in violation of the license, even when that's the way the copyright holder provided it to them. It's possible for the copyright holder to change his mind and sue them at any time. They went through this for two years or so with KDE, it was very painful but the result was positive for everyone - Troll fixed its licensing.
Gentoo can include everything it wants, until the day they get into legal trouble. Then, they'll start taking rules from the Debian policy manual.
This is a variation of making keys "by impression". It takes advantage of the fact that master-keyed locks (not Master brand locks) have split pins, and that the master usually is the lower part of the split - although I don't see that this always has to be true. If the master used either the upper or lower part of the split, at random, it would take longer to figure this out - first you'd have to find all of the splits, and then figure out which side of the splits is the master for each pin.
Michael, it turns out, sent me an excel spreadsheet attached to an email, and in that spreadsheet I appear as the final speaker. Michael contends that this should be considered an "offer". I generally get offers in English, rather than in a spreadsheet, but in the interest of getting along and resolving this situation I will withdraw the comment that I didn't get the offer.
They aren't pulling out because I am not speaking. They are pulling out because Lindows took a unilateral action.
My not speaking isn't particularly important, and in itself this would never be reason for HP to pull out or even for me to make a fuss.
All of that said, there are some people at the New HP who may just now be finding out who it is they lost in the merger. I'll be accepting my invitation to their reception at LinuxWorld, hopefully they will get a chance to get to know me better.
First, the reason for our existence is not to destroy Microsoft, or even to displace them from the desktop. If you want to do that, it's fine, just please don't expect everybody to thank you for it.
Second, this community works when we do things together. The reason there's a dispute now is that somebody doesn't want to play that way. So, we will have a much larger, better, and authentic summit next time, in conjunction with one of the established Linux shows, and it will be run fairly.
The originals for those postings are here on Lindows.com's bulletin board. They come from Kevin Carmody, Lindows.com's president. That he wrote this stuff boggles my mind, but he wrote it.
It's a common tactic for the bully to portray themselves as the oppressed party. I am firing arrows into poor Michael Robertson's back!!!! I am blowing a whistle, for a good reason.
No, nobody offered me the closing spot. But people from Lindows have been saying a number of things that aren't connected with reality. It's very strange.
My participation in the conference has been publicized for months, so I don't understand how Lindows would not have known that the person they hired to set up the conference had put me in the keynote position. That person is a long-time participant in Linux business whose integrity should not be questioned. And anyway, since she was working for Lindows, if you are to believe them entirely unsupervised for months, they need to take responsibility for the work she did - which had no problem.
Regarding their comments about my public speaking prowess - both Michael and I were on NPR the other day, and the broadcast archive is at sciencefriday.com . Judge for yourself. But they have been saying this about anyone they moved into a panel slot (those are all very short) or otherwise rejected - they seem to all be bad speakers. Most of the people they say the advisory board asked for were moved into panel slots.
We want Lindows on the team, but as a team player.
It's their right to hold a party and call all of the shots. But they can't expect us all to come to the party on their terms.
A lot of people say this about trademark law, but I've had attorneys tell me it isn't true. What you need to do is keep your trademark from becoming generic. To paraphrase the old Sanka commercial's, that's "PCI brand peripheral bus". The word Xerox became generic for photocopy, but I doubt that PCI could possibly become generic for peripheral bus.
I'm not familiar with ferroelectricity. It sounds as if the pickup device is like a scanning tunneling microscope, with an AC field on the point to measure the impedance of an adjacent ferroelectric domain. They claim that there is a change in the impedance of the domain depending on its electrical orientation, and that they can flip these domains electricaly (presumably with the same device that reads them, I guess by putting a higher voltage pulse through it). They claim that ferroelectric materials are piezoelectric, and that they are distorting the crystal lattice to store information.
Slashdot Mirror
There must be speed-of-propogation issues when electric transmission lines of different length are fed. I'd like to hear more about them.
Bruce
-
Digital ones that use the 60 Hz power frequency for their timing signal, rather than another oscillator like a quartz crystal.
- Mechanical ones powered by the AC line, not a wind-up spring or battery. Pretty much all of those use a synchronous motor that locks itself to the 60Hz AC wave.
The wind-up kind, and any clocks that run exclusively by battery power, won't be effected.By the way, quartz isn't the only material that can act as an electronic tuning fork. Early electronic clocks actually used mechanical tuning forks. Ceramic resonators are used, rather than quartz, in less precise applications. And piezoelectric crystals (which is what the quartz ones are) can be made of other materials, you can even make them from cream of tartar! Look up Rochelle Salts.
Bruce
Well-designed software is beautiful. It can be read and understood easily because it explains itself. It performs correctly, it is easy to change without breaking something, it is quick to develop.
It's far from clear to me that this is something you arrive at using a UML diagram alone. Nor do I believe that UML is necessary for most architects to figure out what to model and how to organize their code. I'd think that a great diagram could easily be followed by a horrible implementation.
But all really good engineering is art. Examples abound in architecture, automotive and aircraft design, and electronics.
If you're not able to appreciate that, I feel sorry about your handicap.
Bruce
Bruce
Bruce
This is what I got out of the "dict" command:
v 1: give to understand; "I insinuated that I did not like his wife" [syn: {adumbrate}, {insinuate}]
2: imply as a possibility; "The evidence suggests a need for more clarification" [syn: {suggest}]
Bruce
Itanium and Hammer aren't yet suitable for an investment as large as Pixar has just made. The chips and motherboards aren't cost-effective compared to 32-bit, and there's not enough experience with that hardware yet to point out all of the gotchas. Next time. They'll probably do another render farm in a year. They want to get 3 or 4 times their present size - at least in square feet of office space. Crazy as that sounds, if you've seen the present huge campus.
Bruce
Bruce
No, Linus has the Linux trademark. He only has the copyright for his own code.
Bruce
Remember the iAPX 432? A message-passing architecture implemented in hardware, with every function living in its own privilege ring. You could do that machine right today. And you wouldn't have to use ADA to do it. Someone should make more new silicon in this direction. IA64 goes a little bit in this direction, but it's too easy for operating systems and compilers to not use its capabilities in the name of portability. With the '432, there was never any possibility of the OS running on anything else.
Bruce
Bruce
Regarding your claim that VMS is optimized for Fourier wave analysis, I can't believe that this is unique today. The main impetus behind VAX BSD was ARPA's desire to have a Unix system that would handle the memory demands of computer graphics. We made use of various Unix systems at Pixar and Pixar's predecessors, where there were similar sorts of problems (texture rendering rather than FFT) and Linux is now the darling of those places.
This is a VM and cache issue, not really rocket science these days.
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce
Gentoo can include everything it wants, until the day they get into legal trouble. Then, they'll start taking rules from the Debian policy manual.
Bruce
Bruce
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce
My not speaking isn't particularly important, and in itself this would never be reason for HP to pull out or even for me to make a fuss.
All of that said, there are some people at the New HP who may just now be finding out who it is they lost in the merger. I'll be accepting my invitation to their reception at LinuxWorld, hopefully they will get a chance to get to know me better.
Bruce
Second, this community works when we do things together. The reason there's a dispute now is that somebody doesn't want to play that way. So, we will have a much larger, better, and authentic summit next time, in conjunction with one of the established Linux shows, and it will be run fairly.
Bruce
The originals for those postings are here on Lindows.com's bulletin board. They come from Kevin Carmody, Lindows.com's president. That he wrote this stuff boggles my mind, but he wrote it.
Bruce
No, nobody offered me the closing spot. But people from Lindows have been saying a number of things that aren't connected with reality. It's very strange.
My participation in the conference has been publicized for months, so I don't understand how Lindows would not have known that the person they hired to set up the conference had put me in the keynote position. That person is a long-time participant in Linux business whose integrity should not be questioned. And anyway, since she was working for Lindows, if you are to believe them entirely unsupervised for months, they need to take responsibility for the work she did - which had no problem.
Regarding their comments about my public speaking prowess - both Michael and I were on NPR the other day, and the broadcast archive is at sciencefriday.com . Judge for yourself. But they have been saying this about anyone they moved into a panel slot (those are all very short) or otherwise rejected - they seem to all be bad speakers. Most of the people they say the advisory board asked for were moved into panel slots.
We want Lindows on the team, but as a team player. It's their right to hold a party and call all of the shots. But they can't expect us all to come to the party on their terms.
Bruce
Bruce
So, is all this for real?
Thanks
Bruce