All else being equal, if you use N times as many satellites to compute a position/velocity/time solution, your expected accuracy improves by a factor of sqrt(N). But it's not quite that good when you have a multi-solution due to uncertainties in the system clocks between the constellations.
Even in the ideal case, you can usually get more improvement from other techniques than just averaging more inputs. The first thing to attack is ionospheric delays, then a suite of several other errors that are similar in magnitude: GNSS ephemeris (position and velocity) errors, errors in the satellite clocks, other atmospheric delays, etc.
Simple differential approaches use a receiver at a known location to compute (the sums of) several of those errors at each time of interest. Because a single receiver can't distinguish certain errors from each other, those corrections become less accurate over distance. More sophisticated approaches use a widely separated set of receivers to break the errors down into the individual components, so that the corrections can be applied over a wider area.
It's not really true any longer that the military signals provide better accuracy. DGPS approaches, including SBAS (FAA's WAAS being the first), can provide approximately the same accuracy as the military PPS, while also providing integrity assurances (in that domain's jargon, integrity means you have a bound on how wrong your calculated position is). The main advantage of the military signals now is improved availability, both in terms of anti-jamming and anti-spoofing measures.
There is some advantage for military receivers in that they can use L2 to estimate dispersion due to the ionosphere, which is easily the largest source of errors for SPS receivers, but an increasing number of satellites transmit civil signals on a second frequency or use "codeless" approaches to make the same estimations using the military encrypted signals on L1 and L2.
If the complaint is right, Apple advertised a 5.8" screen when the delivered screen is under 5.7". That's a complaint about accuracy at least as much as precision.
"You're so vain / You probably think this [comment] is about you / You're so vain / I'll bet you think this [comment] is about you / Don't you? / Don't you?" - slightly adapted from Carly Simon
A lot of people would take my argument and use it to say that's why they would not visit the United States. I would argue that their concerns about arbitrary arrests are unjustified, but apparently my comment hit an authoritarian nerve -- you instead argued that the Chinese people would live up to all the stereotypes of a totalitarian state.
If China does not want their international-criminal citizens to be arrested and subjected to good-cause hearings to be extradicted for their crimes, maybe they should keep those criminals at home instead of complaining that they are being "kidnapped" when treaties about nuclear sanctions are used.
It's also richly ironic that China complains about a suspected criminal being arrested when they are still holding hostages to lure a fugitive back into their clutches.
No. For that navigation, I want something that can run entirely on my device, with data caching that I explicitly manage. Similarly with the other kind of applications you mention, but in reverse: I would mostly rather them store things locally and explicitly ask me when to put my data in the cloud.
To what country are you referring?
USA. I use a Nexus 6P bought from Google, running on T-Mobile. My wife's iPhone SE (bought from apple, on the same T-Mobile account) behaves similarly to mine. I have no idea what kind of miserable phone or plan you used that hijacks IP traffic in the way you describe, and am probably happier not knowing.
If you are that worried about being arrested on made-up charges when you visit a country, how about DON'T VISIT THAT COUNTRY. If you are worried that said country will make it hard to do business there or persecute your employees if executives stop paying so much attention to it, how about DON'T DO BUSINESS IN THAT COUNTRY.
Sometimes the better business decision is to turn down a prospect.
Some of us fogeys use "program" to describe an executable that lives in one (program) address space, and "application" to describe the features provided by some set of programs (or possibly a single program) that work together.
If we are going to be pedantic about the distinction.
Why do I need that? I've never seen an app that I think should pretend to be online when it isn't. And my phone's wireless hotspot does not cost extra to use.
I think a calculator is the most complicated software I have locally installed that doesn't regularly read or write local files. I don't really see the point of PWA or the like if they are only accessing web resources or data that are private to the app.
Electron is an app "platform" that basically involves installing an app-private copy of Chromium, a node.js webserver, and running the application's logic mostly in Javascript between the two.
To paraphrase Churchill, Electron is the worst architecture for desktop applications, except for all the other ones that have been tried.
Having a low credit score -- or even no credit history -- will not prevent you from buying plane or train or bus tickets in the US. It will only prevent you from getting a credit card to buy a ticket on credit.
Having a low social credit score -- and having none is not an option -- can prevent you from buying those tickets in China.
If you're going to spout such garbage, you should at least make it obscure enough that it isn't immediately obvious as garbage.
That's utter bullshit. The US credit rating system is not defined, managed, or widely used by the US government. Having a low credit score does not mean your travel is restricted, which is how the Chinese system made news recently. It isn't based on your political behavior or social speech. It doesn't keep your children out of top schools, it isn't planned to be shown on social media services, and won't determine your eligibility for jobs or Internet speeds or any of the other things Wikipedia lists. You're positing an absurdly false equivalence.
The government is not proposing to use this at all for citizens (or, I believe, permanent residents). It's strictly one suggested input for how to pick immigrants who are the most likely to contribute in a positive way to the United States.
Cell towers do have multiple sectors, but I find it hard to believe that the channel state information from two of them (because any given phone will not have a line of sight to three sectors) is enough to determine the phone's location. The environment is full of weird reflectors and obstructions that make the signal not just fall off with a power of the distance.
There's no way tower-based locations are as good as GPS, at least when GPS is available. (Inside buildings and under foliage might be a different question.) There just aren't enough towers to triangulate a phone's location using mobile network signals as well as a phone can triangulate its own location using GPS signals -- those are optimized for location performance, whereas mobile network signals are usually optimized for some data throughput measure.
It was trying to be the Twitter of video clips. Any video one posted had to be 6 seconds or less. There may have been something about automatically looping the clip. Nothing of value was lost.
Or are they going to inter the entire team with the dead spacecraft, so that the team may continue to do science and otherwise support the mission in the afterlife?
Only your first sentence was at all accurate. Political correctness started out as a way to silence and suppress people with the wrong politics -- whether they disagreed with the Communist Party or some other totalitarian regime -- and continues to have the same essential character today. Identifying it is not a suppressive action.
Slashdot Mirror
All else being equal, if you use N times as many satellites to compute a position/velocity/time solution, your expected accuracy improves by a factor of sqrt(N). But it's not quite that good when you have a multi-solution due to uncertainties in the system clocks between the constellations.
Even in the ideal case, you can usually get more improvement from other techniques than just averaging more inputs. The first thing to attack is ionospheric delays, then a suite of several other errors that are similar in magnitude: GNSS ephemeris (position and velocity) errors, errors in the satellite clocks, other atmospheric delays, etc.
Simple differential approaches use a receiver at a known location to compute (the sums of) several of those errors at each time of interest. Because a single receiver can't distinguish certain errors from each other, those corrections become less accurate over distance. More sophisticated approaches use a widely separated set of receivers to break the errors down into the individual components, so that the corrections can be applied over a wider area.
It's not really true any longer that the military signals provide better accuracy. DGPS approaches, including SBAS (FAA's WAAS being the first), can provide approximately the same accuracy as the military PPS, while also providing integrity assurances (in that domain's jargon, integrity means you have a bound on how wrong your calculated position is). The main advantage of the military signals now is improved availability, both in terms of anti-jamming and anti-spoofing measures.
There is some advantage for military receivers in that they can use L2 to estimate dispersion due to the ionosphere, which is easily the largest source of errors for SPS receivers, but an increasing number of satellites transmit civil signals on a second frequency or use "codeless" approaches to make the same estimations using the military encrypted signals on L1 and L2.
Geez, obviously the theme of the meeting was secret lobsters.
But they can't tell you why the lobsters are secret. That's also secret.
If the complaint is right, Apple advertised a 5.8" screen when the delivered screen is under 5.7". That's a complaint about accuracy at least as much as precision.
"You're so vain / You probably think this [comment] is about you / You're so vain / I'll bet you think this [comment] is about you / Don't you? / Don't you?" - slightly adapted from Carly Simon
A lot of people would take my argument and use it to say that's why they would not visit the United States. I would argue that their concerns about arbitrary arrests are unjustified, but apparently my comment hit an authoritarian nerve -- you instead argued that the Chinese people would live up to all the stereotypes of a totalitarian state.
If China does not want their international-criminal citizens to be arrested and subjected to good-cause hearings to be extradicted for their crimes, maybe they should keep those criminals at home instead of complaining that they are being "kidnapped" when treaties about nuclear sanctions are used.
It's also richly ironic that China complains about a suspected criminal being arrested when they are still holding hostages to lure a fugitive back into their clutches.
Noah Webster you are not.
No. For that navigation, I want something that can run entirely on my device, with data caching that I explicitly manage. Similarly with the other kind of applications you mention, but in reverse: I would mostly rather them store things locally and explicitly ask me when to put my data in the cloud.
USA. I use a Nexus 6P bought from Google, running on T-Mobile. My wife's iPhone SE (bought from apple, on the same T-Mobile account) behaves similarly to mine. I have no idea what kind of miserable phone or plan you used that hijacks IP traffic in the way you describe, and am probably happier not knowing.
If you are that worried about being arrested on made-up charges when you visit a country, how about DON'T VISIT THAT COUNTRY. If you are worried that said country will make it hard to do business there or persecute your employees if executives stop paying so much attention to it, how about DON'T DO BUSINESS IN THAT COUNTRY.
Sometimes the better business decision is to turn down a prospect.
Some of us fogeys use "program" to describe an executable that lives in one (program) address space, and "application" to describe the features provided by some set of programs (or possibly a single program) that work together.
If we are going to be pedantic about the distinction.
Why do I need that? I've never seen an app that I think should pretend to be online when it isn't. And my phone's wireless hotspot does not cost extra to use.
I think a calculator is the most complicated software I have locally installed that doesn't regularly read or write local files. I don't really see the point of PWA or the like if they are only accessing web resources or data that are private to the app.
Electron is an app "platform" that basically involves installing an app-private copy of Chromium, a node.js webserver, and running the application's logic mostly in Javascript between the two.
To paraphrase Churchill, Electron is the worst architecture for desktop applications, except for all the other ones that have been tried.
It was his work terminal because that was the end of the line for him.
You know the old line. Cheap, convenient, secure: pick any two.
If you want a well-designed system, you need to pay for it in either dollars or privacy. I recommend dollars.
Having a low credit score -- or even no credit history -- will not prevent you from buying plane or train or bus tickets in the US. It will only prevent you from getting a credit card to buy a ticket on credit.
Having a low social credit score -- and having none is not an option -- can prevent you from buying those tickets in China.
If you're going to spout such garbage, you should at least make it obscure enough that it isn't immediately obvious as garbage.
That's utter bullshit. The US credit rating system is not defined, managed, or widely used by the US government. Having a low credit score does not mean your travel is restricted, which is how the Chinese system made news recently. It isn't based on your political behavior or social speech. It doesn't keep your children out of top schools, it isn't planned to be shown on social media services, and won't determine your eligibility for jobs or Internet speeds or any of the other things Wikipedia lists. You're positing an absurdly false equivalence.
The government is not proposing to use this at all for citizens (or, I believe, permanent residents). It's strictly one suggested input for how to pick immigrants who are the most likely to contribute in a positive way to the United States.
Cell towers do have multiple sectors, but I find it hard to believe that the channel state information from two of them (because any given phone will not have a line of sight to three sectors) is enough to determine the phone's location. The environment is full of weird reflectors and obstructions that make the signal not just fall off with a power of the distance.
There's no way tower-based locations are as good as GPS, at least when GPS is available. (Inside buildings and under foliage might be a different question.) There just aren't enough towers to triangulate a phone's location using mobile network signals as well as a phone can triangulate its own location using GPS signals -- those are optimized for location performance, whereas mobile network signals are usually optimized for some data throughput measure.
"Remember that all models are wrong; the practical question is how wrong do they have to be to not be useful." - George E. P. Box
It was trying to be the Twitter of video clips. Any video one posted had to be 6 seconds or less. There may have been something about automatically looping the clip. Nothing of value was lost.
Seriously, are we not doing phrasing any more?
Or are they going to inter the entire team with the dead spacecraft, so that the team may continue to do science and otherwise support the mission in the afterlife?
I guess he never heard the advice that if you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging.
Only your first sentence was at all accurate. Political correctness started out as a way to silence and suppress people with the wrong politics -- whether they disagreed with the Communist Party or some other totalitarian regime -- and continues to have the same essential character today. Identifying it is not a suppressive action.
Nuclear fusion?