So sorry your mud hut isn't conducive to modern technology. Probably wouldn't help you much though,since you don't even have a modern cellphone which receives both GPS and GLONASS satellite signals. It obviously makes you upset to be wrong.
I just ran an Android "GPS Status" app on my phone. I went into a half bath in the middle of my house (no exterior wall), closed the door, and saw I had a fix on 15 GPS satellites. Then I went out on the deck, and saw the exact same. The signal levels were a bit higher, but same number of satellite fixes.
There's no such thing as an ntp stratum 0 server. Stratum 0 is the time source itself (Cs, GPS, etc.), the server stratum starts at 1.
WWF broadcasts on HF. Propagation delays are variable, and can easily result in multiple ms of variability within the continental US. It's not just "telling the server how far it is from the tower."
It's not difficult to stay sync'd to a local server within a ms using ntp over WiFi, as long as the device has a good local clock. Problem is, most devices use crystals which are pretty temperature sensitive, so temperature changes tend to move the clock out of sync pretty quickly.
"You can't use off the shelf GPS receivers for lab-grade time standards"
Not sure what you consider "lab-grade time standards", but 10 nanosecond accuracy is readily obtained by a $25 GPS receiver with PPS output. What WWV receiver do you use which is cheaper and better?
"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."
Problem is, you can't legally broadcast on any of the WWV frequencies. And rightly so - it's not like WiFi, where you lock to a particular AP, it would be useless with multiple signals in an area.
Not sure where you live, buy my WWV clock in the midwest is very "iffy" for reception. A $25 GPS receiver is much more reliable (and accurate). But I'd like to see a $50 wall clock which uses WiFi and NTP - really only needs to connect once a day like the WWV ones, so power requirements would be minimal. If it needs C cells instead of AA, so be it. (Looks.like those might exist now!, via alibaba)
While WWV is a useful service, I have to question a cost of $6.3 MM/year. A rough calc says it costs less than $250K/yr in electrical power for both sites. I'll grant another $1MM for equipment maintenance and personnel. They already have to maintain time and frequency standards, by law.
As far as time and frequency dissemination goes, GPS does a vastly better job, with better coverage in almost all cases.
That would be disingenuous - "one anonymous Slashdot reader" instead of "the submitter", or even better, just include the private comment as part of the summary, like other submissions. On/., "editor" isn't. More of a moron than an oxymoron. Are they paid for their shit?
"There's an easier way to get rid of all the cigarette butts," suggests one anonymous Slashdot reader.
"Just train the crows to attack smokers."
Not in the discussion. WTF? Is editordavid making up shit out of whole cloth to disguise a personal bias? And, it appears that this "anonymous Slashdot reader" is not only ignorant of French culture, but one of those extremely intolerant Antifa members.
IP Protection laws need to be on a "use it or lose it" basis.
Absolutely not. Terms should simply be shorter. It's a perfectly legitimate marketing strategy to make things unavailable for some time, then re-release them to a new generation. Disney did it for years, their movies going in and out of distribution. That's not do say that Disney isn't also evil - they're a large part of why terms are unreasonably long.
Non sequitur. How many of those boat owners say they keep things "boatshape?" You claim a dinghy isn't a boat. Is a sloop not a sailboat? Most civilians don't follow the navy and call submarines, "boats."
Is a cutter a boat or a ship? Why is a Marine Protector Class Boat not a ship, when it carriesa boat? Why do the names of all US Navy Torpedo Boats and submarines start with USS (U.S. Ship)?
Forget about any rule of thumb - with so many exceptions, the fact remains that there is no objective difference between a boat and a ship - it's all based of someone's personal, subjective, experience. Hell, the military can't even be consistent.
Slashdot Mirror
They're going to fuel the rockets with the on-board astronauts? Soylent green is rocket fuel, too!
So sorry your mud hut isn't conducive to modern technology. Probably wouldn't help you much though,since you don't even have a modern cellphone which receives both GPS and GLONASS satellite signals. It obviously makes you upset to be wrong.
The claim was unqualified, and false as stated. GPS penetrates some buildings just fine.
OK, I'll bet you $1000.
(pause)
I just ran an Android "GPS Status" app on my phone. I went into a half bath in the middle of my house (no exterior wall), closed the door, and saw I had a fix on 15 GPS satellites. Then I went out on the deck, and saw the exact same. The signal levels were a bit higher, but same number of satellite fixes.
There's no such thing as an ntp stratum 0 server. Stratum 0 is the time source itself (Cs, GPS, etc.), the server stratum starts at 1.
WWF broadcasts on HF. Propagation delays are variable, and can easily result in multiple ms of variability within the continental US. It's not just "telling the server how far it is from the tower."
It's not difficult to stay sync'd to a local server within a ms using ntp over WiFi, as long as the device has a good local clock. Problem is, most devices use crystals which are pretty temperature sensitive, so temperature changes tend to move the clock out of sync pretty quickly.
"This may surprise you, but GPS in-building penetration is zero."
Only the claim is suprising, because the it's not true in fact as anyone with a cell phone can tell you.
But, your mom's basement may be an edge case.
"You can't use off the shelf GPS receivers for lab-grade time standards"
Not sure what you consider "lab-grade time standards", but 10 nanosecond accuracy is readily obtained by a $25 GPS receiver with PPS output. What WWV receiver do you use which is cheaper and better?
" I certainly wouldn't want to depend on something that needs the internet... that would be foolish."
I have my own local stratum 1 NTP server, you ignorant, foolish clod. No need for the Internet.
"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."
Eisenhower
Problem is, you can't legally broadcast on any of the WWV frequencies. And rightly so - it's not like WiFi, where you lock to a particular AP, it would be useless with multiple signals in an area.
Not sure where you live, buy my WWV clock in the midwest is very "iffy" for reception. A $25 GPS receiver is much more reliable (and accurate). But I'd like to see a $50 wall clock which uses WiFi and NTP - really only needs to connect once a day like the WWV ones, so power requirements would be minimal. If it needs C cells instead of AA, so be it. (Looks.like those might exist now!, via alibaba)
While WWV is a useful service, I have to question a cost of $6.3 MM/year. A rough calc says it costs less than $250K/yr in electrical power for both sites. I'll grant another $1MM for equipment maintenance and personnel. They already have to maintain time and frequency standards, by law.
As far as time and frequency dissemination goes, GPS does a vastly better job, with better coverage in almost all cases.
Paper punch tapes were much more fragile.
"Interestingly this was done *after* something has been posted on Slashdot."
Sure, for all definitions of "after" which mean "before."
"who came up with that name?"
Some guy who's always wanted to be the top Space Cadet.
While you're at it, please ignore our new Space Force.
Yeah, a law forcing discrimination and equality of outcome is going to pass Constitutional muster. What a blatantly sexist law.
"Noted how quickly that bug got reopened after this hit /."
/. had lots to do with it.
Yeah, it's like Google has a time machine and can go back from the 6:00AM time it was posted here in order to re-open the ticket at 01:59AM.
This was reported on XDA weeks ago, Android Police a couple of days ago, and on Reddit shortly after.
Yeah,
That would be disingenuous - "one anonymous Slashdot reader" instead of "the submitter", or even better, just include the private comment as part of the summary, like other submissions. On /., "editor" isn't. More of a moron than an oxymoron. Are they paid for their shit?
Not in the discussion. WTF? Is editordavid making up shit out of whole cloth to disguise a personal bias? And, it appears that this "anonymous Slashdot reader" is not only ignorant of French culture, but one of those extremely intolerant Antifa members.
Absolutely not. Terms should simply be shorter. It's a perfectly legitimate marketing strategy to make things unavailable for some time, then re-release them to a new generation. Disney did it for years, their movies going in and out of distribution. That's not do say that Disney isn't also evil - they're a large part of why terms are unreasonably long.
Non sequitur. How many of those boat owners say they keep things "boatshape?" You claim a dinghy isn't a boat. Is a sloop not a sailboat? Most civilians don't follow the navy and call submarines, "boats."
Is a cutter a boat or a ship? Why is a Marine Protector Class Boat not a ship, when it carries a boat? Why do the names of all US Navy Torpedo Boats and submarines start with USS (U.S. Ship)?
Forget about any rule of thumb - with so many exceptions, the fact remains that there is no objective difference between a boat and a ship - it's all based of someone's personal, subjective, experience. Hell, the military can't even be consistent.
What's with this "naval sense?" The military defines terms only for the military. Want to get into a discussion of what a "gun" is?
So, this is a ship carrying boats? And this too?
" a citation. We can look at it..."
You then went on to make claims which were totally unsupported by that "citation." You lose. *plonk*