The company (Coverity) which did the audit are the ones who should be thanked not the DHS.
DHS paid for the company to do this. It was a government initiative. Hence, some props to DHS are in order. And to Coverity, of course, for doing a good job.
Actually, silicon is a very good thermal conductor, although not as good as copper (150 W/mk, vs. 400W/mk for copper.) However, as a heat transfer mechanism, both of these pale in comparison to moving water. A heat pipe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_Pipe), which transports heat by evaporating water at the hot end and condensing it at the cool end, can have an effective thermal conductivity many times better than copper. Moving vapor or liquid is also a lot more effective at moving heat long distances than thermal conduction - the motion of the fluid reduces the thermal resistance to almost zero after the heat has been transferred to the fluid.
There has to be a balance. Most brilliant people tend to have personality quirks and most people with "perfect fit personalities" tend to be mediocre.
I've worked with three people who I would consider brilliant. Two were very personable. One had some personality issues, but not to the extent of being a psychopath. I would call him "occassionaly difficult".
As for everyone else I've worked with, I'm not sure I've seen a difference in competence between pleasant and unpleasant people (putting aside their ability to work with others.)
The reason for doing a non-spinning black hole is that it's an easier calculation to make. Once they have some experience with this simulator I'm sure they will move on to spinning black holes.
My latest C project is an embedded avr system, where this is of course very important. The solution has been to make a header file with a bunch of typedefs in it like:
typedef unsigned char uint8; typedef unsigned short uint16;
And so forth. Then I exclusively use the new types. If I need to compile to another platform, I just need to change the portable.h file.
You can even go one further with:
#if sizeof(unsigned char) == 1 typedef unsigned char uint8; #else #error "No uint8 type available" #endif
That way the compiler will warn you if there's a problem when you switch platforms.
(This solution was not mine, but another developer's.)
I work for a small company (~20 employees) which was founded by a PhD doing research on DoD SBIR contracts. He was the President (we had no CEO) for many years. After a few years, some of those research ideas panned out into products which we needed to develop and sell. The founder realized that there was too much work to do, and we brought in a CEO. This was a guy he knew well (he'd been on the board of the company for a long time). There is a lot of work the CEO deals with that the founder is happy to be rid of - marketing, scheduling, setting priorities. Most of the important decisions are joint decisions anyway, but the CEO is responsible for pushing to get the decisions made. The founder has gone from 90 hour weeks to 50 hour weeks, and seems much happier for it. He still is involved in fundraising, hiring, etc, but it's not all on him.
Honestly, I think it's a question of both what you want to do and what you think would most likely make the company succeed. Take and guard your ownership stake. Then stick yourself where you think you'll be most valuable. If the company can't survive without you, that's the value that you have. Just make clear from the begining that you intend the company to be run by consensus, not CEO fiat. If you've got a partner who is doing work that you can't or don't want to do but which needs to get done, that's a good thing. A CEO isn't all powerful, and if you two agree on that, I think you can be very happy and effective as a CTO.
There was a particularly ugly case a few years back involving two college age men. One killed a little girl in a casino bathroom. The other one knew he was doing it, but didn't take any action to stop it, or report it afterwards. The second man was not prosecuted.
Perhaps someone with a better memory can find a link to the story.
Now, I bought the Zire for other reasons, and not primarily as a reader. And I don't sit down and read things on it at home. But I've loaded a bunch of things on it (Mark Twain short stories, Machievelli, Plato) which is great if I find myself stuck somewhere with time to kill. It's great for business travel and waiting in long lines.
So it hasn't replaced my regular reading, but certainly has found a place in my reading habits.
Power supplies today rectify the input with no transformer, giving a DC of 240-350 volts or so. (There's a trick by which you can have both 220 VAC and 110 VAC rectify to about the same DC voltage, which is how you have universal supplies.) This is accomplished with diodes and big capacitors.
This is then convertered down at high frequency as the parent poster describes.
Given that you need to do astronomy in the winter when there's no sun, it's probably not an issue. That and exposed skin has other problems in Antartica besides sunburn...
From an engineering point of view, integrating the technology into the cell phone would make the most sense. However, from a social point of view I think it would be a hard sell, as it opens up opportunities for mischief that most people wouldn't sign up for. Do you want random people to be able to mute your cell phone without your knowledge?
I agree that technological solutions are rarely a cure all for social issues such as this one. I think a simple "cell phones will not work during the performance" sign would be enough for me to be ok with the scheme myself. Of course, I just have the babysitter to worry about, and I trust them to be OK on their own for extended periods of time.
How about this - the theater gives you a vibrate-only pager to which you forward your calls (or even to which their conduit automatically routes your calls.) So if you REALLY need to be in touch you can be, but without annoying people around you. And you have to leave the theater to actually talk.
I think this is a fascinating from an engineering trade off point of view. When you design a micropower circuit, you hoard every little bit of power and only expend it when necessary. I'm sure that was the mindset of these developers. And that's exactly the approach that will make the device vulnerable to power analysis.
I'm sure they could have designed it to be, at least, much more insensitive to power analysis. I bet it just didn't occur to them to do so.
I set up a web server at home. My main desire was to store and share my photographs with family and friends. So I wanted a lot of cheap storage, but didn't care TOO much about bandwidth. So a home server on a DSL line works great.
Now, if you have a higher bandwidth application (more friends or substantially more attractive children than I have), then doing it work might work out better.
Universities do not decide what research gets done. Professors apply for grants to outside agencies (NASA, NSF, NIH, etc.,etc.) which are peer reviewed. The awarded money goes to the professor. Universities get a cut of the money ("overhead"), but don't decide what research gets done.
Now, if something gets done which is patentable and potentially licensable, they will certainly pursue it - but the university administration doesn't make the research decisions.
It is up to people to stop responding to this stuff.
Here's where I'd draw an analogy to the credit card business. Credit card companies did not used to be liable for fraud, and did very little to protect people from it. In fact, they would do things that were very insecure (like sending out live, unsolicated credit cards to people, that would get intercepted and used by thieves.) It was a huge problem, and it was eventually solved by Congress limiting individual's liability in credit card fraud cases to $50. Suddenly, the credit industry had a huge incentive to fix the problem, and it is much better than it used to be.
If the companies involved take a "what can we do?" approach (which I don't think they are doing at the moment), then the entire credibility of their online business is going to suffer, to their and everyone else's ultimate detriment. The rational customer response to getting Phished out of their Paypal information is to stop using Paypal.
So what can they do? If a website is in the process of committing fraud with their name, I'm sure they have legal options to pursue in getting it taken down. If not, they certainly should be fighting for the legal tools to do so. Blaming the consumer is very easy, but it's not going to solve the problem. It's just a way to feel like our failures to do anything about it are OK, because WE'RE too smart to fall for it.
I only submit a report if I find the phishing web site is up. Businesses, I think, ought to forward the abuse@xxx.com emails to the correct place, as abuse has become like webmaster - an account name people expect to be answered. (Heck, if you want to sort the abuse emails by type, modify spambayes to score the complaint emails based on your human reps training - it shouldn't take long to train it up.)
Also, why is the email header information so important? I presume the email came from a zombie machine somewhere, and that the most pressing lead (and threat) is the phishing website itself.
Slashdot Mirror
DHS paid for the company to do this. It was a government initiative. Hence, some props to DHS are in order. And to Coverity, of course, for doing a good job.
Actually, silicon is a very good thermal conductor, although not as good as copper (150 W/mk, vs. 400W/mk for copper.) However, as a heat transfer mechanism, both of these pale in comparison to moving water. A heat pipe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_Pipe), which transports heat by evaporating water at the hot end and condensing it at the cool end, can have an effective thermal conductivity many times better than copper. Moving vapor or liquid is also a lot more effective at moving heat long distances than thermal conduction - the motion of the fluid reduces the thermal resistance to almost zero after the heat has been transferred to the fluid.
I've worked with three people who I would consider brilliant. Two were very personable. One had some personality issues, but not to the extent of being a psychopath. I would call him "occassionaly difficult".
As for everyone else I've worked with, I'm not sure I've seen a difference in competence between pleasant and unpleasant people (putting aside their ability to work with others.)
Cool! Thanks!
Good to know. However, these don't seem to be support by avr-gcc (although the vi syntax coloring likes them just fine!).
hmm, it seems
#if sizeof(uint8)!=1
is not valid syntax. Well, I'm sure there's a way to do it properly. Anyone?
My latest C project is an embedded avr system, where this is of course very important. The solution has been to make a header file with a bunch of typedefs in it like:
typedef unsigned char uint8;
typedef unsigned short uint16;
And so forth. Then I exclusively use the new types. If I need to compile to another platform, I just need to change the portable.h file.
You can even go one further with:
#if sizeof(unsigned char) == 1
typedef unsigned char uint8;
#else
#error "No uint8 type available"
#endif
That way the compiler will warn you if there's a problem when you switch platforms.
(This solution was not mine, but another developer's.)
Tough call.
Honestly, I think it's a question of both what you want to do and what you think would most likely make the company succeed. Take and guard your ownership stake. Then stick yourself where you think you'll be most valuable. If the company can't survive without you, that's the value that you have. Just make clear from the begining that you intend the company to be run by consensus, not CEO fiat. If you've got a partner who is doing work that you can't or don't want to do but which needs to get done, that's a good thing. A CEO isn't all powerful, and if you two agree on that, I think you can be very happy and effective as a CTO.
Perhaps someone with a better memory can find a link to the story.
Oops, that's 12 (13 if you count the contraction).
What a bunch of amateurs. When I first plugged in my lastest power supply design, the capacitor exploded.
Now, I bought the Zire for other reasons, and not primarily as a reader. And I don't sit down and read things on it at home. But I've loaded a bunch of things on it (Mark Twain short stories, Machievelli, Plato) which is great if I find myself stuck somewhere with time to kill. It's great for business travel and waiting in long lines.
So it hasn't replaced my regular reading, but certainly has found a place in my reading habits.
And yet, they still seem to be doing OK.
Power supplies today rectify the input with no transformer, giving a DC of 240-350 volts or so. (There's a trick by which you can have both 220 VAC and 110 VAC rectify to about the same DC voltage, which is how you have universal supplies.) This is accomplished with diodes and big capacitors.
This is then convertered down at high frequency as the parent poster describes.
" By 1990 the number of people spending the winter in Antarctica had risen to 1,145." (from http://www.antarcticaonline.com/antarctica/history /history.htm).
Given that you need to do astronomy in the winter when there's no sun, it's probably not an issue. That and exposed skin has other problems in Antartica besides sunburn...
I agree that technological solutions are rarely a cure all for social issues such as this one. I think a simple "cell phones will not work during the performance" sign would be enough for me to be ok with the scheme myself. Of course, I just have the babysitter to worry about, and I trust them to be OK on their own for extended periods of time.
I'm sure they could have designed it to be, at least, much more insensitive to power analysis. I bet it just didn't occur to them to do so.
Now, if you have a higher bandwidth application (more friends or substantially more attractive children than I have), then doing it work might work out better.
Now, if something gets done which is patentable and potentially licensable, they will certainly pursue it - but the university administration doesn't make the research decisions.
Here's where I'd draw an analogy to the credit card business. Credit card companies did not used to be liable for fraud, and did very little to protect people from it. In fact, they would do things that were very insecure (like sending out live, unsolicated credit cards to people, that would get intercepted and used by thieves.) It was a huge problem, and it was eventually solved by Congress limiting individual's liability in credit card fraud cases to $50. Suddenly, the credit industry had a huge incentive to fix the problem, and it is much better than it used to be.
If the companies involved take a "what can we do?" approach (which I don't think they are doing at the moment), then the entire credibility of their online business is going to suffer, to their and everyone else's ultimate detriment. The rational customer response to getting Phished out of their Paypal information is to stop using Paypal.
So what can they do? If a website is in the process of committing fraud with their name, I'm sure they have legal options to pursue in getting it taken down. If not, they certainly should be fighting for the legal tools to do so. Blaming the consumer is very easy, but it's not going to solve the problem. It's just a way to feel like our failures to do anything about it are OK, because WE'RE too smart to fall for it.
Also, why is the email header information so important? I presume the email came from a zombie machine somewhere, and that the most pressing lead (and threat) is the phishing website itself.