Worship's not necessary - these chips are about as simple as it gets, and they're a lot of fun to play with. It's amazing how many things you can make with a chip that's nothing more than a simple timer.
I don't remember the exact design of my circuit, but it was based on a sweeping tone generator circuit from an electronics magazine, and used a CdS photoresistor from a light meter to cut the sound. The best approach would be to look at a few existing designs and modify one. Sites like this have plenty of starter material. http://home.cogeco.ca/~rpaisley4/LM555.html
Severe to profound losses range from PTAs of 75 dB and greater.
I think you may have mixed up your measurements. The 75dB referred to in TFA is the noise level. The 75dB in your linked page is the level of hearing loss - that is, the threshold at which the person can hear a sound of that pitch. The standard TWA for industrial noise is 85dB for 8 hours, so it's unlikely this device would cause any problems.
In fact, many years ago, I used to make little devices with two 555 CMOS chips (or one 556), a photocell and a hearing aid speaker coil. They'd put out this high-pitched heterodyning whine that sounded a lot like a mosquito circling. The trick was to hide one in a dark area like a cupboard or under furniture so when someone opened the cupboard, or let light under the furniture, the photocell would cut the noise. There was no way they could locate it by sound, and you could fit the whole thing in a matchbox. As far as I'm aware, we never sent anyone deaf. Insane perhaps, but they could definitely still hear...
But you still dont know that the source code and the binary
running on the machine are related to each other in any way.
So don't use binary. There are plenty of interpreted languages which are fast enough to run something this simple. Write it in Java and use a standard off-the-shelf VM.
Better watch your step watch, Mitt. You're not in Utah anymore.
Why should he start worrying now. Playing to the corporates has been working well for him so far. http://thinkprogress.org/index.php?p=819
Don't forget, he's a (former) venture capitalist who spent almost 10 million to get elected. He's there for a reason...
How is PUPPY on an old Compaq Armada 1585DMT with only 32 MB of RAM?
Probably not good. Puppy loads everything into RAM or swap and runs from there. That makes it very fast on systems which have enough RAM (>128Mb), but a real dog on low memory systems. DSL, Slack or DeLi are better bets for your old Compy.
Then just hand the bad ones to the dev/QA team and the good ones to the public.
Interesting. Maybe FFE4 can tell us;
Was the distro to be used pre-selected by Microsoft?
Was he aware of similar studies involving other major distros (ie, Redhat, Debian etc)?
What were the disclosure agreements with MS - could they have suppressed findings which showed Linux in a positive light?
For desktop apps the CPUs will suck, but for 3D rendering and video encoding/decoding (oh yeah, audio processing too), the 360s triple-core CPU is going to be pretty amazing
That's a pretty good incentive to get Linux running on them. Having a handful of them as rendernodes would be a great application, and would be great to have Microsoft sponsoring the independant Australian film industry to the tune of $US170.00 per node...
Microsoft might as well not even bother with clustering - they're so far behind the game that there's almost no way they can catch up.
They'e not trying to catch up. The latest trend in consumer CPUs is to multicore and hyperthreading, and it looks like that's the way future improvements will go. If Moore's law is to hold true, then parallelism will be part of our desktop computing future.
Burton's (he's from Tera, not Cray btw) background is in multithreaded supercomputers, so the expertise he'll bring to the table is in getting Microsoft apps running efficiently on the desktops we'll have three to five years from now.
As to health issues, isn't silicosis the result of chronic exposure?
Silicosis is the result of chronic exposure to crystalline silica, and it was believed that the illness was caused by mechanical irritation and subsequent scarring (plaques) of the lung tissues. Amorphous silica was considered to be safe since its rounded aspect meant it could be removed by the body's macrophages relatively easily.
We do know now though, there is a form of acute silicosis which is caused by inflammation of the lung tissues in contact with large amounts of silica (chemical toxicity). The onset is much more rapid (weeks or months instead of years) but it is likely it will be a treatable illness where chronic silicosis is not.
(This wasn't by a study sponsored by Microsoft either - & as you see, as to a main quote & support of quite the opposite of what you stated? WINDOWS STILL OFFERS BETTER TCO VALUE!)
Laura DiDio independant? There wouldn't be lot of Kool Aid left over your way, I'd say...
The economic consequences of free software are such that it results in software becoming not only free as in speech but as in beer.
Not really, and only for certain claasses of software. What you're actually seeing is the commoditization of a product which has a zero cost of production. In an open market, software like operating systems and office suites, which have barely improved in the past decade, would have tended towards zero price.
They have long since amortized their development costs, and since production and distribution are essentially free, their true value should be a token royalty.
The computer using community has tolerated monopoly rents because we recognise computing as a field where we would like innovation to continue. We pay much more than the token value in order to provide the resources that software companies need to be able to improve the product. When you bought Office XP, you weren't jsut paying for that version, you were paying for the expectation that Office 2003 would be significantly better.
What open software does, is to demonstrate that the cost of innovation in OS and similar classes of software is much lower than the fees that Microsoft is charging. That's why Microsoft's FUDsters hate FOSS so much. It's not that FOSS is a competitor, they know how to treat them, it's because FOSS is a demonstration to the world just how much their tolerance for a monopoly is costing them.
It is the conformity to fact or actuality, a statement proven to be or accepted as true, or fidelity to an original or standard, but that's not important right now.
Sheet feeder, ha. I'm off to swap the photocopier and shredder around.
Re:Throw your Microsoft boxes into Boston Harbor!
on
The Demise of IP?
·
· Score: 1
What they mean by stifling competition is that small companies, which usually spark R&D, would go belly up without IP because they wouldn't be able to recoup the investment in any new invention / IP.
That's why there are so few FOSS distros/OSs competing with each other and so many closed source OSs in competition.
Slashdot Mirror
Worship's not necessary - these chips are about as simple as it gets, and they're a lot of fun to play with. It's amazing how many things you can make with a chip that's nothing more than a simple timer.
I don't remember the exact design of my circuit, but it was based on a sweeping tone generator circuit from an electronics magazine, and used a CdS photoresistor from a light meter to cut the sound. The best approach would be to look at a few existing designs and modify one. Sites like this have plenty of starter material. http://home.cogeco.ca/~rpaisley4/LM555.html
Severe to profound losses range from PTAs of 75 dB and greater.
I think you may have mixed up your measurements. The 75dB referred to in TFA is the noise level. The 75dB in your linked page is the level of hearing loss - that is, the threshold at which the person can hear a sound of that pitch.
The standard TWA for industrial noise is 85dB for 8 hours, so it's unlikely this device would cause any problems.
In fact, many years ago, I used to make little devices with two 555 CMOS chips (or one 556), a photocell and a hearing aid speaker coil. They'd put out this high-pitched heterodyning whine that sounded a lot like a mosquito circling. The trick was to hide one in a dark area like a cupboard or under furniture so when someone opened the cupboard, or let light under the furniture, the photocell would cut the noise. There was no way they could locate it by sound, and you could fit the whole thing in a matchbox. As far as I'm aware, we never sent anyone deaf. Insane perhaps, but they could definitely still hear...
I mean irritating smell and irritating lighting dont stop people from going to bars do they?
They still come in, they just don't sit next to me.
But you still dont know that the source code and the binary running on the machine are related to each other in any way.
So don't use binary. There are plenty of interpreted languages which are fast enough to run something this simple. Write it in Java and use a standard off-the-shelf VM.
Better watch your step watch, Mitt. You're not in Utah anymore.
Why should he start worrying now. Playing to the corporates has been working well for him so far. http://thinkprogress.org/index.php?p=819
Don't forget, he's a (former) venture capitalist who spent almost 10 million to get elected. He's there for a reason...
How is PUPPY on an old Compaq Armada 1585DMT with only 32 MB of RAM?
Probably not good. Puppy loads everything into RAM or swap and runs from there. That makes it very fast on systems which have enough RAM (>128Mb), but a real dog on low memory systems. DSL, Slack or DeLi are better bets for your old Compy.
The worst model has a reported failure rate of almost 30%! Yet somehow Apple seems to still be doing well, people still want to buy iPods.
Funny how those numbers are so close to 100%, isn't it. Do you think you might've misinterpreted those stats just a little?
because a competing company purchasing 10,000 of these then modifying them in a manor
Why whould you use a big house? Wouldn't a factory be a better option?
Interesting. Maybe FFE4 can tell us;
Yet, I bet both of them combined aren't as lucrative when it comes to funding terrorism as hitting your local gas station for a fill-up.
I dunno, Microsoft seem do be doing all right with their version of the same thing.
Rich food and heartburn go together.
Fortunately you're here to provide us with diet brainfood.
Thanks...
Here, I'll fix that for you.
"Insert Windows CD. Reboot. Reboot. Reboot. Reboot. Reboot..."
For desktop apps the CPUs will suck, but for 3D rendering and video encoding/decoding (oh yeah, audio processing too), the 360s triple-core CPU is going to be pretty amazing
That's a pretty good incentive to get Linux running on them. Having a handful of them as rendernodes would be a great application, and would be great to have Microsoft sponsoring the independant Australian film industry to the tune of $US170.00 per node...
So will this mean non-medicinal consumption of beer will become illegal?
Just as soon as Roche or Bayer patents it and corners the market in hops.
Microsoft might as well not even bother with clustering - they're so far behind the game that there's almost no way they can catch up.
They'e not trying to catch up. The latest trend in consumer CPUs is to multicore and hyperthreading, and it looks like that's the way future improvements will go. If Moore's law is to hold true, then parallelism will be part of our desktop computing future.
Burton's (he's from Tera, not Cray btw) background is in multithreaded supercomputers, so the expertise he'll bring to the table is in getting Microsoft apps running efficiently on the desktops we'll have three to five years from now.
It's TOO EASY for me to get the "Pro-Linux Penguins" to 'foam @ the mouth'
There's certainly a lot of froth happening here. None pro-Linux that I can see though.
As to health issues, isn't silicosis the result of chronic exposure?
Silicosis is the result of chronic exposure to crystalline silica, and it was believed that the illness was caused by mechanical irritation and subsequent scarring (plaques) of the lung tissues. Amorphous silica was considered to be safe since its rounded aspect meant it could be removed by the body's macrophages relatively easily.
We do know now though, there is a form of acute silicosis which is caused by inflammation of the lung tissues in contact with large amounts of silica (chemical toxicity). The onset is much more rapid (weeks or months instead of years) but it is likely it will be a treatable illness where chronic silicosis is not.
(This wasn't by a study sponsored by Microsoft either - & as you see, as to a main quote & support of quite the opposite of what you stated? WINDOWS STILL OFFERS BETTER TCO VALUE!)
Laura DiDio independant? There wouldn't be lot of Kool Aid left over your way, I'd say...
Sales of Windows systems accounted for 36.9 percent of all server revenue in the quarter, versus 31.7 percent for Unix and 11.5 percent for Linux.
Windows costs more than Linux. News at 11.
"Works ok in Canada. All things in moderation, eh?
Fixed that typo for you...
The economic consequences of free software are such that it results in software becoming not only free as in speech but as in beer.
Not really, and only for certain claasses of software. What you're actually seeing is the commoditization of a product which has a zero cost of production. In an open market, software like operating systems and office suites, which have barely improved in the past decade, would have tended towards zero price.
They have long since amortized their development costs, and since production and distribution are essentially free, their true value should be a token royalty. The computer using community has tolerated monopoly rents because we recognise computing as a field where we would like innovation to continue. We pay much more than the token value in order to provide the resources that software companies need to be able to improve the product. When you bought Office XP, you weren't jsut paying for that version, you were paying for the expectation that Office 2003 would be significantly better.
What open software does, is to demonstrate that the cost of innovation in OS and similar classes of software is much lower than the fees that Microsoft is charging. That's why Microsoft's FUDsters hate FOSS so much. It's not that FOSS is a competitor, they know how to treat them, it's because FOSS is a demonstration to the world just how much their tolerance for a monopoly is costing them.
I wonder what is the the truth?
It is the conformity to fact or actuality, a statement proven to be or accepted as true, or fidelity to an original or standard, but that's not important right now.
Flatbeds don't count... must use a sheet feeder.
Sheet feeder, ha. I'm off to swap the photocopier and shredder around.
What they mean by stifling competition is that small companies, which usually spark R&D, would go belly up without IP because they wouldn't be able to recoup the investment in any new invention / IP.
That's why there are so few FOSS distros/OSs competing with each other and so many closed source OSs in competition.
No, wait...
woah, hey. i am not bearded.
Are you doing a headstand?