Also, please for god's sake let me see what I type.
^^^^ This this this.
I use some long password phrases and I occasionally make a mistake when entering them. If I was able to see the characters I'd be able to correct my typo. This is especially annoying when using the craptastic user-hostile user interfaces on TVs where you have to dick around with the remote, slowly bumping along from letter to letter at a snail's pace.
codec = compressor/decompressor serdes = serializer / deserializer modem = modulator / demodulator Most of these terms originated in hardward and migrated to software.
And that's when you youngn's went off the track and sullied my ossified view of this here world, dangnabbit!;)
No a codec is a description of a process (coding and decoding). The way it is implemented is entirely up to the person creating it.
Fun fact, codec was was used to describe hardware conversion of audio in both analogue and digital domains long before it was used to describe software compression, conversion, and other processes on your computer.
That's why you probably think Democrats are better. They're still running under the "lesser of 2 evils" model.
I'm happy to take the lesser of two evils. By definition it's the better choice.
Oh, and not to put too fine a point on it, but all that stuff you mentioned was covered in the mainstream media, some of it extensively. Claiming it "wasn't covered" doesn't make it so.
Because most of them labor under the impression that the free market solve everything better than government.
I hear what you're saying, but there's never been a free market, and the so-called free market is usually much, much worse at solving problems than the government is. The profit motive is usually detrimental when applied to human beings.
Yeah, you're right - I guess with that high a data density you can afford to give some up for the sake of redundancy. Slows down the throughput a bit though.
Yeah, there's always a trade-off, but in most cases accuracy takes precedence over speed. Of course, by the time this is a reality we'll probably have banks of quantum computers built in to the BB, each doing a kabillion operations per nanosecond.:)
Human nature sees to it that people think that the choice they made was for the best one, not for the second worst one.
Not always. I sometimes vote against my own personal best interests if I think that the big picture (i.e. the "greater good") is more important.
For example, I usually vote for school funding even though I personally no longer have children in school. I see the bigger picture- today's school children will be our future doctors, engineers, politicians, etc etc etc, and it's in everyone's best interest that they're more educated rather than less.
So while it might be best for me personally not to have to pay for a school (more money in my pocket), the fact is that it's not just me that's going to this dance.
90% sounds good, but that's also a 10% failure rate. Ewwwwwwwwww, not good.
It's a good start but I wouldn't trust anything that's wrong 10% of the time. When it gets to 99.999999999%, then I'd trust it.
I agree, detecting trees may not be a life or death problem, but then again it might if you're landing a plane or something similar. But it's a good start and will probably only get better.
Yes, but how much shielding against stray radiation will be required to preserve the integrity of all that data?
You'd just use error-correcting code. Store 3 copies (or 5 or 10 or whatever) and do comparisons...it would be easy to spot the copy that's changed from the ones that hadn't. The old "tell me three times" routine:
1) My dog likes to play in the yard. 2) My dog likes to play in the yard. 3) My dog likes to play in the yard. 4) My dog likes to play iK the yard. 5) My dog likes to play in the yard. 6) My dog likes to play in the yard. 7) My dog likes to play in the yard.
Which one got corrupted? The one that doesn't match all the others. (Okay, so the BB might have to be 20 microns bigger, but still...)
Slashdot Mirror
Also, please for god's sake let me see what I type.
^^^^ This this this.
I use some long password phrases and I occasionally make a mistake when entering them. If I was able to see the characters I'd be able to correct my typo. This is especially annoying when using the craptastic user-hostile user interfaces on TVs where you have to dick around with the remote, slowly bumping along from letter to letter at a snail's pace.
"Software engineers in Seattle stay at companies an average of six months longer than do their counterparts in San Francisco"
Six whole months, well I'll be gobsmacked. I've spent longer than that fucking up a single document.
Good lord, do they swear an oath of fealty to display such unwavering allegiance and faithfulness?
Your unassailable logic and first-hand knowledge is no match for my stubborn dismissal of the facts! ;)
grumble grumble grumble grumble
codec = compressor/decompressor
serdes = serializer / deserializer
modem = modulator / demodulator
Most of these terms originated in hardward and migrated to software.
And that's when you youngn's went off the track and sullied my ossified view of this here world, dangnabbit! ;)
So you are going to call the graphics card rendering OpenGL triangles software?
Yes, no matter how wonderfully pointy and triangular they are.
grumble grumble firmware grumble grumble
Despite people far more knowledgeable than I correcting me, I will stick to my outmoded and almost certainly erroneous mode of thinking!
You'll not sway my thinking with your tricky, underhanded facts! lol
Probably, but instead of two cat pictures it will be two interactive cat holograms
Cat holograms! Be still mah heart!
Will the cats have flying cars? Because that would be worth waiting for.
No a codec is a description of a process (coding and decoding). The way it is implemented is entirely up to the person creating it.
Fun fact, codec was was used to describe hardware conversion of audio in both analogue and digital domains long before it was used to describe software compression, conversion, and other processes on your computer.
I reject your reality and substitute my own! ;)
Keyword, "chip".
A codec can be implemented in hardware but it is not hardware. They may as well have said "My mp3 has a hairline crack in it".
A codec is simply something that converts audio/video/whatever from one format to another. It certainly can be hardware.
No. It can be implemented in hardware but it is not hardware. You can buy a codec, but you can't have a hairline crack in a piece of software.
You may as well say "My mp3 has a hairline crack in it"
"hairline crack in the solder connection on the audio codec,"
A codec is software, who knew software could have a hairline crack in the solder?
"Windows 10, the most advanced advertising system, errr, I mean "operating system" we've ever released!"
Uber Admits Its Ghost Driver 'Greyball' Tool Was Used To Thwart Regulators, Vows To Stop
"We didn't do it and we promise never to do it again!!"
Or maybe, "You caught us and we'll be more careful not to get caught next time! Ain't I a stinker ha ha ha!"
That's why you probably think Democrats are better.
They're still running under the "lesser of 2 evils" model.
I'm happy to take the lesser of two evils. By definition it's the better choice.
Oh, and not to put too fine a point on it, but all that stuff you mentioned was covered in the mainstream media, some of it extensively. Claiming it "wasn't covered" doesn't make it so.
90% sounds good, but that's also a 10% failure rate. Ewwwwwwwwww, not good.
That's not how it works. The goal in this kind of situation is not to get a perfect score, it's to get a somewhat reliable one
Tell that to the pilot landing your plane at night in the fog. I do NOT want him to be "90% sure" that those aren't trees in front of us.
It's better than Marc Bolan.
Flashback triggered...
Hard to believe he's been gone for 40 years. :(
Jesus christ, I *am* old.
That's 40 zettabytes or 40 sextillion bytes.
Roughly. :)
So by the time this becomes commercially available, that would be roughly 2 cat pictures and a Word document.
I'm reminded of this every time I look at the track record of Republican voters.
Because most of them labor under the impression that the free market solve everything better than government.
I hear what you're saying, but there's never been a free market, and the so-called free market is usually much, much worse at solving problems than the government is. The profit motive is usually detrimental when applied to human beings.
Yeah, you're right - I guess with that high a data density you can afford to give some up for the sake of redundancy. Slows down the throughput a bit though.
Yeah, there's always a trade-off, but in most cases accuracy takes precedence over speed. Of course, by the time this is a reality we'll probably have banks of quantum computers built in to the BB, each doing a kabillion operations per nanosecond. :)
Human nature sees to it that people think that the choice they made was for the best one, not for the second worst one.
Not always. I sometimes vote against my own personal best interests if I think that the big picture (i.e. the "greater good") is more important.
For example, I usually vote for school funding even though I personally no longer have children in school. I see the bigger picture- today's school children will be our future doctors, engineers, politicians, etc etc etc, and it's in everyone's best interest that they're more educated rather than less.
So while it might be best for me personally not to have to pay for a school (more money in my pocket), the fact is that it's not just me that's going to this dance.
How well does it compare to humans?
We'd probably not get a 100% score either.
I bet the average human would do a hell of a lot better than 90%.
90% sounds good, but that's also a 10% failure rate. Ewwwwwwwwww, not good.
It's a good start but I wouldn't trust anything that's wrong 10% of the time. When it gets to 99.999999999%, then I'd trust it.
I agree, detecting trees may not be a life or death problem, but then again it might if you're landing a plane or something similar. But it's a good start and will probably only get better.
Yes, but how much shielding against stray radiation will be required to preserve the integrity of all that data?
You'd just use error-correcting code. Store 3 copies (or 5 or 10 or whatever) and do comparisons...it would be easy to spot the copy that's changed from the ones that hadn't. The old "tell me three times" routine:
1) My dog likes to play in the yard.
2) My dog likes to play in the yard.
3) My dog likes to play in the yard.
4) My dog likes to play iK the yard.
5) My dog likes to play in the yard.
6) My dog likes to play in the yard.
7) My dog likes to play in the yard.
Which one got corrupted? The one that doesn't match all the others. (Okay, so the BB might have to be 20 microns bigger, but still...)
It sounds like we may have finally hit the limit for density of data storage. Kinda hard to get below the atomic level.
Think of the amount of data you could store in a single copper BB if the atoms could be used as memory. Holy fuck.
Ten million Libraries of Congress? 100 million? A billion?