If it were that simple, then the companies making these chips would never use this scheme. Most people would buy the cheap stuff and unlock later - whereas today, they buy the more expensive mid-range stuff. This is revenue lost.
How does the mentioned (1:300000) ratio relate to persistence of vision?
This ratio is completely avoid of units. it does not specify a period of time or power. The persistance of vision on the other hand, is all about time and power. For the sake of making a point, I can be toggling that "on and off" dot at the above mentioned ratio at 1MHz. I would indeed, have to build a scanning device that scans at 30G Dots per Second, but non-the-less, I would have turned that led "on" a Million times per second! So the eye would need to remember the led was on for only a millionth of a second - before i would refresh the memory. Now, the human eye can notice about 24fps - therefore, you can remember any lit-dot for about, 30mSecs >> 1usec. so the fact is, that i could probably manage with even a 1MHz scanning device.
And the price shows that the product is aimed for mass consumer markets. not that it's bad. Is your $300 iPod crap?
Within a few years, to my prediction, the internet would become a necessary commodity as electricity is today.
Having your internet "not work" will be simply unacceptable.
Regarding data reliability, one can assume a detailed contract with the hosting company that would force them to create hourly backups or whatever...
I think the demand for such a high-quality, high-reliability service would be so great that all the technical/legal/privacy problems you're talking about would be resolved in one way or the other.
(btw, I'm sure you don't keep off-site backups of your optical media... so in the event of a fire, you'd lose your data anyway. So i think one can achieve a reasonable reliability factor for a given price. Want more protection? pay more. Like you would today for a serious backup solution.)
I think that the trend is to move to online content with attitudes more on the lines of: I'll just download that from the internet whenever i need it rather then burn a DVD of it.
I wouldn't be surprised if in a decade or two, all of your "large" personal media files (photos and videos) would be stored in a HD format somewhere online for easy access. Desktop CDs/DVDs/Whatever burners will be a thing of the past. All other "small" personal data (code, documents, etc..) would be stored on flash cards or perhaps encrypted online file servers.
If I had a fast enough internet uplink (latencies lower than 10ms and speeds greater than 100MB/s), I might consider paying a monthly fee for a few terrabytes of high-quality online storage... within a decade, that could be reality.
from TFA: "Mempile's DVD drives will initially retail for between $3,000 and $4,000, and a 700GB platter -- the first model expected out around 2011 -- will sell for $30"
Too bad it looks like a toy from fisher price. Plus, anyone in the know would suspect you've robbed it from a poor Nigerian child or something (other than assuming you've acquired one legitimately).
You can quite easily design a logic that would allow you to shift one chunk of data and write a new one in the same "write-sequence" that the 100MB/s was derived from.
Thanks to algorithms that spread written data across the chip, MTBF's of SSD are much higher than those of regular HDDs with similar usuage patterns.
Furthermore, A simple buffering scheme sounds likely to solve most of the problems you're talking about (Assuming it's constantly many small writes done by the OS... for say, log file keeping or file access-time updating).
The engineering problems involved in chips and in the human body are quite different, the human body being a much more convoluted construction than a microchip. People keep forgetting that we designed the chips from ground up. We understand them from the most basic and fundamental parts up to the most complex - all of them, were designed by engineers.
Incrementally improving your (human kinds) own invention is MUCH easier than repairing something you did not create.
We cannot even construct basic, let alone complex organisms from scratch (chemicals and raw materials) in the labs. Had we been able to do that, we could attempt an intelligent fix on a broken organism.
Biology today seems to me like it's brute forcing for a solution... can you imagine a microprocessor being built by brute forcing for combinations of transistors?
Too bad the problem space is 10e5000000000+ combinations and up.
By your standard, FM might be considered encryption since you can't understand it using the "naked ear".
FHSS is not an encryption standard. it is a communication method, that as a SIDE-EFFECT makes it a bit harder to eavesdrop - but it was not the intent of the technology!
On the other hand, WEP is supposed to make eavesdropping hard, but miserably fails doing so.
FHSS is not a method of encryption. FHSS is designed to resist narrowband interference - not to provide security. Since the carrier frequency is changed all the time, it is possible to share a frequency band using FHSS with very little interference.
However, if I were to detect a conversation using FHSS i would use a wide-band sort of receiver and quite easily detect where the conversation hops to.
Agagin, FHSS is not usable for secure communications by itself - it has to be combined with real encryption to provide any security.
The point of encryption is not to make the signal seem like background noise - if that were the case, it would most certainly be impossible to decrypt it without losing data (since some background noise would have to sneak in).
An Encrypted link, means that the data payload is encrypted. But the encapsulating packet is still very much ordinary.
You see, the problem with calling a supercomputer "a cluster in a plamtop" is that there's nothing stopping us from stacking a room full of these "palmtop" devices and making an even larger cluster.
I think the definition of a supercomputer should be changed to something along these line: "A super computer is any computer which is considered one of the top-N fastest computers in the world today."
Obviously, Microsoft had to work their way to get exclusively into every retail store. They didn't start out that way. Now, if they're forcing it to stay that way - that's anti competitive.
But if a product has 90% market share, every store who wants to stay in business has to supply the demand for that product. It's not the other way around.
Most stores, won't bother with niche market products - that's why there are specialty stores.
You can't just pick up a focused ion beam microscope on radioshack the same way you can't pick up Linux on any joe's pc supermarket.
Slashdot Mirror
If it were that simple, then the companies making these chips would never use this scheme.
Most people would buy the cheap stuff and unlock later - whereas today, they buy the more expensive mid-range stuff. This is revenue lost.
How does the mentioned (1:300000) ratio relate to persistence of vision?
This ratio is completely avoid of units. it does not specify a period of time or power.
The persistance of vision on the other hand, is all about time and power.
For the sake of making a point, I can be toggling that "on and off" dot at the above mentioned ratio at 1MHz.
I would indeed, have to build a scanning device that scans at 30G Dots per Second, but non-the-less, I would have turned that led "on" a Million times per second!
So the eye would need to remember the led was on for only a millionth of a second - before i would refresh the memory.
Now, the human eye can notice about 24fps - therefore, you can remember any lit-dot for about, 30mSecs >> 1usec.
so the fact is, that i could probably manage with even a 1MHz scanning device.
And the price shows that the product is aimed for mass consumer markets. not that it's bad.
Is your $300 iPod crap?
It's actually more like, 3 different colored scanning laser beams.
And if they "Scan" fast enough, you might not be able to notice they scan at all with the naked eye.
In the Ukraine, Royalties pay you!
The clue is base 64 for:
{ ':' => '', ' ' => '-', 's\n' => 's.com\n' }
Now, if you notice [RFC 3548] later changed to 4648:
"CB-" ":" ":" ":"
":"
my 30-seconds attempt is over.
It's all a matter of quality of service.
Within a few years, to my prediction, the internet would become a necessary commodity as electricity is today.
Having your internet "not work" will be simply unacceptable.
Regarding data reliability, one can assume a detailed contract with the hosting company that would force them to create hourly backups or whatever...
I think the demand for such a high-quality, high-reliability service would be so great that all the technical/legal/privacy problems you're talking about would be resolved in one way or the other.
(btw, I'm sure you don't keep off-site backups of your optical media... so in the event of a fire, you'd lose your data anyway. So i think one can achieve a reasonable reliability factor for a given price. Want more protection? pay more. Like you would today for a serious backup solution.)
Convenience is key.
I tend to disagree.
I think that the trend is to move to online content with attitudes more on the lines of:
I'll just download that from the internet whenever i need it rather then burn a DVD of it.
I wouldn't be surprised if in a decade or two, all of your "large" personal media files (photos and videos) would be stored in a HD format somewhere online for easy access.
Desktop CDs/DVDs/Whatever burners will be a thing of the past.
All other "small" personal data (code, documents, etc..) would be stored on flash cards or perhaps encrypted online file servers.
If I had a fast enough internet uplink (latencies lower than 10ms and speeds greater than 100MB/s), I might consider paying a monthly fee for a few terrabytes of high-quality online storage... within a decade, that could be reality.
from TFA: "Mempile's DVD drives will initially retail for between $3,000 and $4,000, and a 700GB platter -- the first model expected out around 2011 -- will sell for $30"
Too bad it looks like a toy from fisher price.
Plus, anyone in the know would suspect you've robbed it from a poor Nigerian child or something (other than assuming you've acquired one legitimately).
A movie? I don't know about that.
But I'm sure there's porn for it.
This highly depends on the chip architecture.
You can quite easily design a logic that would allow you to shift one chunk of data and write a new one in the same "write-sequence" that the 100MB/s was derived from.
Well, that's assuming the algorithm is not allowed to move unrelated, already written, data around.
Thanks to algorithms that spread written data across the chip, MTBF's of SSD are much higher than those of regular HDDs with similar usuage patterns.
Furthermore, A simple buffering scheme sounds likely to solve most of the problems you're talking about (Assuming it's constantly many small writes done by the OS... for say, log file keeping or file access-time updating).
We understand them from the most basic and fundamental parts up to the most complex - all of them, were designed by engineers.
Incrementally improving your (human kinds) own invention is MUCH easier than repairing something you did not create.
We cannot even construct basic, let alone complex organisms from scratch (chemicals and raw materials) in the labs. Had we been able to do that, we could attempt an intelligent fix on a broken organism.
Biology today seems to me like it's brute forcing for a solution... can you imagine a microprocessor being built by brute forcing for combinations of transistors?
Too bad the problem space is 10e5000000000+ combinations and up.
By your standard, FM might be considered encryption since you can't understand it using the "naked ear".
FHSS is not an encryption standard. it is a communication method, that as a SIDE-EFFECT makes it a bit harder to eavesdrop - but it was not the intent of the technology!
On the other hand, WEP is supposed to make eavesdropping hard, but miserably fails doing so.
WEP is an security standard. FHSS is not.
FHSS is not a method of encryption.
FHSS is designed to resist narrowband interference - not to provide security.
Since the carrier frequency is changed all the time, it is possible to share a frequency band using FHSS with very little interference.
However, if I were to detect a conversation using FHSS i would use a wide-band sort of receiver and quite easily detect where the conversation hops to.
Agagin, FHSS is not usable for secure communications by itself - it has to be combined with real encryption to provide any security.
That is just silly.
The point of encryption is not to make the signal seem like background noise - if that were the case, it would most certainly be impossible to decrypt it without losing data (since some background noise would have to sneak in).
An Encrypted link, means that the data payload is encrypted. But the encapsulating packet is still very much ordinary.
Wouldn't using a radio on the battlefield give out the soldier's location?
Or at least, make the enemy aware to his presence?
I can see soldiers forgetting to turn this off...
Your video card is probably the bottleneck.
I would say the kicker is that it draws significantly less power, rather than producing little noise.
Obviously, the fan is making the noise, not the chip.
I bet you could probably find a 8800GTX with some high-end silent cooling rig.
You see, the problem with calling a supercomputer "a cluster in a plamtop" is that there's nothing stopping us from stacking a room full of these "palmtop" devices and making an even larger cluster.
I think the definition of a supercomputer should be changed to something along these line:
"A super computer is any computer which is considered one of the top-N fastest computers in the world today."
A jock is not an athlete, see here for clarification.
this is a misperceived chicken & egg paradox.
Obviously, Microsoft had to work their way to get exclusively into every retail store. They didn't start out that way.
Now, if they're forcing it to stay that way - that's anti competitive.
But if a product has 90% market share, every store who wants to stay in business has to supply the demand for that product.
It's not the other way around.
Most stores, won't bother with niche market products - that's why there are specialty stores.
You can't just pick up a focused ion beam microscope on radioshack the same way you can't pick up Linux on any joe's pc supermarket.
Not saying that modifying existing cells and DNA isn't useful (on the contrary).
But you can't claim you've "Created Life" by modifying an existing instance.
Exactly my thoughts,
Call me when they create the cell to which the artificially created DNA will be inserted to, from scratch.