Actually, Finland has little in common with Russia and most Baltic countries as well.
Another similarly sized country they have most in common with? Hungary. Yes, the Hungary which is separated by the Baltic Sea, Poland and Czech from them. They are a completely distinct ethnic group the Finno-Ugric peoples, than about all the rest of europe (which is Indo-European).
It's a different culture, wildly different (and horribly difficult) language, different mentality. Most of countries around are either Slavic or German peoples, but these two are not nearly as far apart as some would believe, while Finno-ugric are far, far away. To give Americans a clue, German-Slavic-Ugrofinnic relation could be compared to Texan-Mexican-Chinese.
Don't ascribe to malice what can be explained by stupidity/incompetence.
Have a closer look at a typical patent examiner.
He finished Law.
He's the guy who partied all night throughout most of the studies. He'd not pass most of the tests. But he lucked out at cheating in few, pawned his car in to join the extra (paid) course the proffessor said is necessary to pass (then didn't show even once, but the money were paid). He copied your answers from your sheet on the final exam. He finished the studies with lowest grades in the class.
Then he tried to get work at several lawyer agencies. He was accepted for internship then fired a month later for incompetence. He tried working as a public attorney but after the first few cases nobody would choose him due to horrible track record. He tried to make his living giving legal advice, but once his advice landed a significant gang member in prison, and the gang leader told him he'll cut his tongue off if he ever tries to give a legal advice to someone. And meant it.
And then as his bills start to pile up, he takes the desperate step: patent examiner at USPTO.
So he comes to work. He picks up a pile of patents with titles that contain the same words as title of the one he has to examine. He looks at the titles. If any is a different wording of the same name, he denies the patent. Otherwise he accepts it. Then he drinks coffee for the rest of afternoon pretending he checks online for prior art, while in fact chatting with girls in a chatroom. That's it.
He's not smart, he's not responsible, he's not hard-working. It's a fluke he finished the studies, but the fluke didn't repeat and he didn't get a job as a lawyer. That's the kind of people that join USPTO.
Look, these people are lawyers who are not good enough to make money as normal lawyers. Their salary sucks, their jobs suck, but they still stay there and do that job instead of making bazillions in civil cases. That alone should speak lengths about their qualifications.
They don't find these people. These people come to them as last resort because they were too poor at everything else.
...and if you look for news what interesting developments are there in microcontrollers? If you want to know what programming languages are "in"? Compare assemblers of PIC, '51, AVR and ARM (not instruction-by-instruction but in a subjective/descriptive way like an article does)? Learn about new algorithmic techniques in reading accelerometer data? Get news about a new manufacturer with microcontrollers of a completely different family?
You are suggesting a source of data. The question is not about data, it's about magazine articles. Not solving specific problems you have at the moment but expanding your scope, learning things you didn't know they are out there to learn in the first place.
Unfortunately, yes. They have some awesome news on really cool projects people made, but these are usually shallow news articles - a few photos, some lines, no in-depth, no instruction, no deep how-it-works. That is combined with in-depth instructables on very simple and easy projects - stuff anyone can do (or buy from "Maker Shed"). Don't get me wrong - some of the simple, easy projects are quite interesting (like making plastic from curdled milk), but all are on "low difficulty" and most are quite pathetic.
Sure except CNET sounds like a rather poor choice. It's more of buyer's catalogue than a news site, and more of news site than a magazine for hobbyists. You won't find tutorials on new programming languages there, no objective (negative) reviews of new technologies, no instructables on tinkering and hacking.
Sure it shouldn't have to be paper, but it should be the kind of content paper had...
Unfortunately it's rather on the "shallow water" side. It has articles talking about some awesome and hard ideas, and it has DIY instructables on simple, easy things. It doesn't have in-depth instructables on difficult, ambitious, big projects though. News on really interesting projects and instructions/tutorials on simple ones. "Popular audience". Though some of their simple projects are ingenious in their simplicity too.
still, most of pedestrians hit by car at night are a result of the driver getting blinded by oncoming car's headlights, going too far right and not seeing the pedestrian at all.
If you take into account the vast deep nuclear bunkers under the building, with self-sufficient life support, massive communication infrastructure and likely miles of secret passages, $10mln sounds like a very modest price for a secret base for a supervillain.
Try to see a reflective sash or shirt one kilometer away in headlights.
The main lights give you up to 300m range of visibility. Reflective objects may be visible at twice that distance. At 1km away - not a even a shade of chance, especially that you are dazzled by your own headlights reflected from nearby objects.
Note brightness of a light source drops off with square of the distance from it. And in case of reflective surfaces, the distance counts twice - from light source to the surface and back.
Of course far strong light sources will be quite visible. Unless you're blinded by nearby strong light sources.
Can you, with normal headlights on, see a pedestrian a kilometer away?
On a night of full moon, I can see them pretty well with lights off. I may not spot the difference between a slick of oil and a pothole a meter away, but I can pretty well see the curve of the road, the bigger obstacles, very far buildings and so on. The moment I switch headlights on my vision is limited to ~100m. And the moment a car with headlights on approaches from behind a hill/bump (or the asshole doesn't switch to passing beam) my view range is pretty much zero, for the duration of the encounter and about 10s afterwards.
The big surface is to catch maximum amount of light, even far from the Sun. This doesn't need high tensile strength because the forces are minimal. So a micrometeorite will make a hole and...? Nothing. The sail efficiency is reduced by a tiny fraction. The strength applied by light is not nearly high enough to let the rip propagate.
Look up some prior/. stories. There are some new inexpensive solar cells in production and sale already. The problem is the factory is booked solid with 100% of production already pre-sold up to 5 years ahead. Big companies made multimillion dollar orders and currently the loans have to be paid off before more factories are built.
IF the material is indeed oleophobic, as they claim, simply pouring the oil off, or maybe rinsing it gently with water should be all that is needed. Oleophobic essentially means it does NOT stick to the material - it stays away from it!
The essential difference is most oleophilic materials -absorb- the oil, that is hold it in, while passing the water. This one -stops- the oil while absorbing (and then freely passing) the water.
Essentially, much higher "absorption" capacity (because it's not the volume of the cloth that contains the oil, but the surface that encloses it), and no need to squeeze the oil out of it, just pour it down and the cloth remains clean.
So instead of a cubic meter of volume of absorbant, you need six -square- meters of the cloth to enclose the same amount of oil.
I'd say your analogy is too far-fetched. After all, copyright is taking possession over something that didn't exist before. I mean, yes, you could say that it is a theft, stealing - removing the idea from the global, public, free pool of unrealized ideas and preventing anyone from getting exactly the same idea again... uh, actually it seems like copyright is more of a theft than "copyright infringement"...
Slashdot Mirror
But that army would be unstoppable, and if the enemy ran out of alcohol factories and playboy mansions, we'd be in deep trouble.
Actually, Finland has little in common with Russia and most Baltic countries as well.
Another similarly sized country they have most in common with? Hungary. Yes, the Hungary which is separated by the Baltic Sea, Poland and Czech from them. They are a completely distinct ethnic group the Finno-Ugric peoples, than about all the rest of europe (which is Indo-European).
It's a different culture, wildly different (and horribly difficult) language, different mentality. Most of countries around are either Slavic or German peoples, but these two are not nearly as far apart as some would believe, while Finno-ugric are far, far away. To give Americans a clue, German-Slavic-Ugrofinnic relation could be compared to Texan-Mexican-Chinese.
one big problem: winter most of the year.
Or make big corporations bully you into giving up said freedom. And ruin your economy as you resist.
Don't ascribe to malice what can be explained by stupidity/incompetence.
Have a closer look at a typical patent examiner.
He finished Law.
He's the guy who partied all night throughout most of the studies. He'd not pass most of the tests. But he lucked out at cheating in few, pawned his car in to join the extra (paid) course the proffessor said is necessary to pass (then didn't show even once, but the money were paid). He copied your answers from your sheet on the final exam. He finished the studies with lowest grades in the class.
Then he tried to get work at several lawyer agencies. He was accepted for internship then fired a month later for incompetence. He tried working as a public attorney but after the first few cases nobody would choose him due to horrible track record. He tried to make his living giving legal advice, but once his advice landed a significant gang member in prison, and the gang leader told him he'll cut his tongue off if he ever tries to give a legal advice to someone. And meant it.
And then as his bills start to pile up, he takes the desperate step: patent examiner at USPTO.
So he comes to work. He picks up a pile of patents with titles that contain the same words as title of the one he has to examine. He looks at the titles. If any is a different wording of the same name, he denies the patent. Otherwise he accepts it. Then he drinks coffee for the rest of afternoon pretending he checks online for prior art, while in fact chatting with girls in a chatroom. That's it.
He's not smart, he's not responsible, he's not hard-working. It's a fluke he finished the studies, but the fluke didn't repeat and he didn't get a job as a lawyer. That's the kind of people that join USPTO.
Look, these people are lawyers who are not good enough to make money as normal lawyers. Their salary sucks, their jobs suck, but they still stay there and do that job instead of making bazillions in civil cases. That alone should speak lengths about their qualifications.
They don't find these people. These people come to them as last resort because they were too poor at everything else.
Okay, so what is the correct query for Google to tell me what is there interesting and worthwhile to learn about embedded currently?
You're not getting the difference between obtaining answer for a question and reaching out for knowledge.
...and if you look for news what interesting developments are there in microcontrollers? If you want to know what programming languages are "in"? Compare assemblers of PIC, '51, AVR and ARM (not instruction-by-instruction but in a subjective/descriptive way like an article does)? Learn about new algorithmic techniques in reading accelerometer data? Get news about a new manufacturer with microcontrollers of a completely different family?
You are suggesting a source of data. The question is not about data, it's about magazine articles. Not solving specific problems you have at the moment but expanding your scope, learning things you didn't know they are out there to learn in the first place.
Unfortunately, yes. They have some awesome news on really cool projects people made, but these are usually shallow news articles - a few photos, some lines, no in-depth, no instruction, no deep how-it-works. That is combined with in-depth instructables on very simple and easy projects - stuff anyone can do (or buy from "Maker Shed"). Don't get me wrong - some of the simple, easy projects are quite interesting (like making plastic from curdled milk), but all are on "low difficulty" and most are quite pathetic.
Sure except CNET sounds like a rather poor choice. It's more of buyer's catalogue than a news site, and more of news site than a magazine for hobbyists. You won't find tutorials on new programming languages there, no objective (negative) reviews of new technologies, no instructables on tinkering and hacking.
Sure it shouldn't have to be paper, but it should be the kind of content paper had...
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=%22reading+comprehension%22
He didn't ask how to write his own assembler.
He asked where to find a good, consistent source of articles about that kind of problems.
Unfortunately it's rather on the "shallow water" side. It has articles talking about some awesome and hard ideas, and it has DIY instructables on simple, easy things. It doesn't have in-depth instructables on difficult, ambitious, big projects though. News on really interesting projects and instructions/tutorials on simple ones. "Popular audience". Though some of their simple projects are ingenious in their simplicity too.
depending on the oncoming car's speed, maybe 2-3s after the car passed, but good 4-8s (often more) while the car is approaching.
still, most of pedestrians hit by car at night are a result of the driver getting blinded by oncoming car's headlights, going too far right and not seeing the pedestrian at all.
If you take into account the vast deep nuclear bunkers under the building, with self-sufficient life support, massive communication infrastructure and likely miles of secret passages, $10mln sounds like a very modest price for a secret base for a supervillain.
Too bad it's already occupied by one.
following the recent single-atom transistor development, an actual simple CPU that is built from 512 atoms of various elements?
Test that again.
Try to see a reflective sash or shirt one kilometer away in headlights.
The main lights give you up to 300m range of visibility. Reflective objects may be visible at twice that distance. At 1km away - not a even a shade of chance, especially that you are dazzled by your own headlights reflected from nearby objects.
Note brightness of a light source drops off with square of the distance from it. And in case of reflective surfaces, the distance counts twice - from light source to the surface and back.
Of course far strong light sources will be quite visible. Unless you're blinded by nearby strong light sources.
Can you, with normal headlights on, see a pedestrian a kilometer away?
On a night of full moon, I can see them pretty well with lights off. I may not spot the difference between a slick of oil and a pothole a meter away, but I can pretty well see the curve of the road, the bigger obstacles, very far buildings and so on. The moment I switch headlights on my vision is limited to ~100m. And the moment a car with headlights on approaches from behind a hill/bump (or the asshole doesn't switch to passing beam) my view range is pretty much zero, for the duration of the encounter and about 10s afterwards.
0.0003 inch = 0.00762 millimetres
This isn't anything "amazing". It's a thin gauge alufoil.
The big surface is to catch maximum amount of light, even far from the Sun. This doesn't need high tensile strength because the forces are minimal. So a micrometeorite will make a hole and...? Nothing. The sail efficiency is reduced by a tiny fraction. The strength applied by light is not nearly high enough to let the rip propagate.
Look up some prior /. stories. There are some new inexpensive solar cells in production and sale already.
The problem is the factory is booked solid with 100% of production already pre-sold up to 5 years ahead. Big companies made multimillion dollar orders and currently the loans have to be paid off before more factories are built.
IF the material is indeed oleophobic, as they claim, simply pouring the oil off, or maybe rinsing it gently with water should be all that is needed. Oleophobic essentially means it does NOT stick to the material - it stays away from it!
The essential difference is most oleophilic materials -absorb- the oil, that is hold it in, while passing the water. This one -stops- the oil while absorbing (and then freely passing) the water.
Essentially, much higher "absorption" capacity (because it's not the volume of the cloth that contains the oil, but the surface that encloses it), and no need to squeeze the oil out of it, just pour it down and the cloth remains clean.
So instead of a cubic meter of volume of absorbant, you need six -square- meters of the cloth to enclose the same amount of oil.
I wonder if you could sue them for trademark infringement.
I'd say your analogy is too far-fetched. After all, copyright is taking possession over something that didn't exist before. I mean, yes, you could say that it is a theft, stealing - removing the idea from the global, public, free pool of unrealized ideas and preventing anyone from getting exactly the same idea again... uh, actually it seems like copyright is more of a theft than "copyright infringement"...