Ugh, fine. . make me RTF:-p Yes I'd call it negligible, they say that their current design can do a few nanoamps at below 0.5v but hope to get a design that can pump out a microamp at 0.5v. Lets assume they perfected their "high-power" design and look at what it does. 0.000000001A is 1 microAmp, multiply that by 0.5v and you get 0.0000000005W or 0.5 microWatts. Having this thing run for 24 hours would give us 12 microwatt-hours which according to google is 0.0103250478 calories. So if it were 1% efficient (I'd be sure its quite a bit higher) it would draw about 1 calorie a day. ..or about 1/4 of a gram of sugar.
Why not just have volunteers remember the data? If you made a linked list of individuals so that each individual would remember the name/face of the individual after him and also either a 0 or a 1 representing the data he stores. By doing this you would need just under 21 quadrillion people (20,736,000,000,000,000 people to be exact). A doubly linked list would only require that each individual remembers 2 people (before as well as after) which is quite managable. The number of people required obviously goes down with the more information an individual is able to remember.
The ResNet fee is primarily a connection fee and not a usage fee. If your service is permanently terminated, there will be no subsequent refund of the ResNet activation fee, regardless of when the violation occurred.
Uh. ..I'm betting they charge ~$150 or so a semester. ..I'd love to testify to the amount of work that would go into "connecting" a comptuer to the network. ..adding a MAC addy to a whitelist is worth $150 these days? Damn I could make a fortune doing that. ..I think that sentence there offended me more than the insane zero-tolerance policy.
Well I googled (you know. . to uh. . verify the integrity of the summary) but came across something also quite bizarre . ..2 people died after crawling into a large helium filled balloon in a rich suburban neighborhood. ..sometimes google surprises me with what it thinks is relevant to my query.
What are those "obvious" reasons? Air bags were used for the two bugs that are up there right now.
Because those things experienced a crap ton of G's when they hit. . erm, bounced off the ground, not to mention the rotational forces as the thing spins around before coming to a rest. Electronics and metal handle G's a bit better than us humans.
The Hypercone would act as an aerodynamic anchor to slow the vehicle to Mach 1.'"
So. . a parachute then?
On a serious note, why not use a parachute? They've been used before on many missions to mars to slow the vehicle down before the retrorockets fired. I mean I understand the hypercone would work too, but I dont understand why a larger and/or more parachutes wouldn't. Then again I'm no fluidynamicist (is that a word because it sounds really really cool).
Yeah I was going to include that in my post but didn't seem relevant as I see improving signal to noise (directional atennas, shutting off other equipment nearby) as "cheating". For example, assume my cellphone has the best electronics available, how can I increase the signal to noise ratio? Standing at the focal point of a dish aimed at the nearest tower? I just sort of assumed the S/N ratio is going to be essentially constant, or probably worse in the future. You could increase the number of symbols (OFDM vs FSK) but if the signal to noise ratio is essentially constant (which was my assumption) then you really can't, you can only increase the number of symbols (increase frequency).
Nonetheless your point is quite valid, my post was merely incomplete.
They've set up a site where you can see the proof, traverse the logic, and play their unbeatable automaton.
Holy crap. ..you have any idea how badly their server is going to be slashdotted now? It's bad enough when its a php driven webpage but now you've just encouraged slashdotters to try a game or two against it. ..if the server crashes in the middle of a game is it considered a win for the human player?
Even with multiplexing there is still a very real limit to the throughput of a certain frequency. I suppose my point is that there are clever ways to allocate bandwidth to users depending on how much they need, or to combine a bunch of frequencies to get the throughput you need, but it just isn't realistic to think that one day everything can be wireless and sending movies to and from each other no problem. Basically with wires you can do intelligent switching, but wireless requires you to broadcast and take up the whole frequency. Also wires have a much higher ceiling. The more stuff we try to make wireless the more problems there are giong to be. Also if you RTFA you see that this thing basically requires line of sight anyways. ..I love my wireless keyboard and laptop with WIFI and my cell phone, but I don't think its necessary to make everything wireless, lets leave the airways to the things that really need it.
There are 2 ways to increase the amount of data that can be sent. Increase the carrier frequency or increase the bandwidth. What these people have done is increase the carrier frequency. Wireless today runs on 2.4ghz, these devices run up to 60ghz. What does that mean? Well it'll take more energy, higher frequency means higher energy, also it attenuates more, meaning shorter range. Not only that, but it can will be more readily absorbed by things like bricks, desks, your foot, etc.
The alternative to this is to increase bandwidth, say use 2.1ghz through 2.6ghz for 1 signal. The obviously downsides to this are you can't run many concurrent streams.
All in all wireless data transfer has a very real ceiling on the amount of data that can be transferred, lower frequency means longer range and ability to go through obstacles, at the cost of reduced data-carrying capacity. I guess the point of this post is to point out that there is only so far we can go with wireless data transfer. I don't think it will be able to keep up (over the long run) with the increasing size of traffic to be a viable alternative to cables when it comes to things like comptuer networking. Anyone have any thoughts on this?
I believe my sister post said it well. You do have to take the time-scale of the isolated species and the also the mobility of the species. Humans have migrated quite a bit in a relatively short time(geologically) , thanks in part to our innate ability to adapt to all sorts of environments w/o having to rely on genetic mutations to give us the necessary edge from our ancestors to survive. Some species of different animals are genetically specialized to their environment, to the point where they can't interbreed and cannot live well in the other species habitat. Humans don't need that genetic specialization to thrive. Though minor genetic mutations (skin color vs. proximity to equator and sun exposure) do help it isn't strictly necessary. For example, I am a Caucasian, if my genetics were thrown into the Sahara many thousands of years ago do you think I would perish? I may not tolerate the sun/heat as well but I could adapt with wearing more clothing instead of relying on genetic mutations. This is even more relevant considering I would most likely be a member of a small community which I could lean upon or find some niche to fill that I was better suited for.
Especially nowadays with gene therapy and all sorts of medications, sunblock, etc. Genetic mutations are (in my extremely unqualified opinion) not very prevalent for the human species. I certainly wouldn't be surprised if we haven't changed much at all genetically from our earliest ancestors. Besides, how long have cro-magnons (the current human species, I'm not sure on the terminology) existed? Considering the average lifespan has it really been enough generations to have a large enough mutation to create a separate species?
What about OpenMoko? An open source and open hardware cell phone slated for consumer release around October 2007. If Intel wanted to do something seems getting involved there would be a great place to start. Had they have gotten involved a bit sooner they could have probably convinced the developers to use intel hardware instead of what they are currently using (I believe it is samsung . . don't quote me on that though).
Well, my sound card has something called "What U Hear" which basically loops the output back into the input. ..internally. I think it is entirely possible (I don't know this for sure, it is just a logical assumption) that it doesn't even convert it to analog but instead takes the wave stream (series of floating point values at 44.1khz, dont know the technical name) from the OS/driver, and just puts that back into input without using the ADD converter. In this sense it is entirely digital, it skips the analog parts of both input and output; no analog conversion at all. There is no way DRM can stop that (short of maliciously crippling the driver) as it's about as low-level as you can get.
Now that I think about it, im not too sure what a DRM would do. Stop people from saving the actual stream and playing it back later through their player? Stopping people from taking the data before it goes to the soundcard and saving it? I'm sure you could find a software sound card emulator that does just that, takes whatever any program gives to it for it to output and instead saves to disk or something. I think the only way to stop people from recording it would be to introduce jingles and such into the music itself. ..what a joke.
What "nationalistic chest-thumping"? Actually I think it makes a lot of sense. If I was going to make some hardware, would I want it to use the EU system, the US system, or both? By using both you gain redundancy, reliability, and even accuracy.
If the EU made the first positioning system and the US made the 2nd, I'd still say making systems that only used the US's would be a bad idea. GPS-only systems will probably phase out slower due to compatibility issues. A lot of hardware out there was designed for GPS in mind and not Galileo. Anything that is designed for Galileo might as well toss in support for GPS since it already exists. I think you're just taking it the wrong way:-/
I believe what he meant was that a thread that goes wonky and eats up as much CPU as it can is much less noticeable on a multi-core system. If you have 1 program in a state like that on a 1 core machine, your machine is essentially unusable. If you have 3 threads lock up on a 4 core system you might not notice at all. . .
Oh eating hamsters is no big deal. . it's eating live ones that is terrifying. . have you ever seen Mr.Lemiwinks? I don't know about you but the idea of a hamster going on a quest through my insides is definitely terrifying. . .
You misread the article, it clearly states "- 122 orders of magnitude larger". So while the magnitude of the energy density is "ridiculously high" it is the sign that is truly interesting. Negative energy has some bizarre properties.
Ah yeah, I omitted a few keywords like "for". My goal was to make it as confusing as possible by using bizarre keywords like strictfp, transient, syncrhonnized, instanceof, etc. Keywords that aren't used that much. Also I wanted it to not look like java, so anything that isn't typically used much in java code went in. Notice the assert and ? operator. I used ? instead of if-else for a reason. Also gotta love the "break again" statement, didn't know you could break to label. Do-while loop with the while at the end, etc. Not to mention that the class always throws itself as an exception. . for some reason I find that freaking hilarious. Maybe someday I'll rewrite it to truly include them all. I can confidently say that in its current form it servers its purpose.
Oh I throughly concur. We should set up a sourceforge project to get the community involved. There are a lot of aspects of the Java language that simply aren't being utilized. Check out this program I made a few months ago. It contains every Java keyword and is (nearly) impossible to follow the logic. Again due to the lameness of the lameness filter you'll have to go to http://rafb.net/p/g46jLN20.html to see it in all its correctly-indented and colored glory, but here it is:
public strictfp class Semantics extends Exception { private static volatile transient boolean l = false; private transient volatile static short j = 1; public volatile static transient Exception LogicClass = new Semantics(); protected strictfp synchronized boolean WTF() throws Exception { again: do { l = !l; without: try { assert l ? true : LogicClass instanceof Semantics; continue; } catch (AssertionError e) { j++; LogicClass = new Exception(); break again; } finally { switch (j % 2) { case 0: LogicClass = this; break again; default: break without; } } } while (--j > -10 ? false : true); throw this; } public static void main(String[] args) { Semantics s = new Semantics(); try { System.out.println(s.WTF()); } catch (Exception e) { System.out.print(s.l); } } }
I spent about an hour on this, but I think it's funny. There was no way to get this past the lameness filter, so I used nopaste: http://rafb.net/p/D1f39951.html Here is a little teaser though:)
/** * This program is an elaborate joke about the strucuture of the Java * programming language. Technically you'll have to put all the * public interfaces and classes in their own file to get it to * compile. The actual code came from a slashdot post, comments were * later added by ookabooka. * * Originally Copyright 2002 MillionthMonkey. * * Ridiculously verbose and mostly useless comments (AKA good * commenting) added by ookabooka Copyright 2007. * * Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); * you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. * You may obtain a copy of the License at * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, * software distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" * BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express * or implied. See the License for the specific language governing * permissions and limitations under the License. * * TODO: * Add some try/catches and a plethora of exceptions to further insult * Java. * * @author ookabooka * @version 2.41.54b_2-rc4 * @see http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/14/20 11208 */
Well, I think in situations like that you should go with a "best guess". Say they have a galaxy, 60% say elliptical and 20% say counter clockwise and 20% say clockwise. Wouldn't that be more valuable than 100% I dont know?
BTW: One good way my high school astronomy teacher taught us to differentiate was ellipticals are usually like a light-source surrounded by fog or just plain fog, whereas spirals have more definite bounds. I also think they tended to be certain colors as well (spiral=blue elliptical=orange) but I'm not certain on that. ..I'm going to talk to a friend of mine who is an astrophysics major and see if she can give any helpful strategies.
Slashdot Mirror
Ugh, fine. . make me RTF :-p Yes I'd call it negligible, they say that their current design can do a few nanoamps at below 0.5v but hope to get a design that can pump out a microamp at 0.5v. Lets assume they perfected their "high-power" design and look at what it does. 0.000000001A is 1 microAmp, multiply that by 0.5v and you get 0.0000000005W or 0.5 microWatts. Having this thing run for 24 hours would give us 12 microwatt-hours which according to google is 0.0103250478 calories. So if it were 1% efficient (I'd be sure its quite a bit higher) it would draw about 1 calorie a day. . .or about 1/4 of a gram of sugar.
More like it could develop into a new weight loss program. Realistically though, the power that it would end up draining is probably negligible.
Why not just have volunteers remember the data? If you made a linked list of individuals so that each individual would remember the name/face of the individual after him and also either a 0 or a 1 representing the data he stores. By doing this you would need just under 21 quadrillion people (20,736,000,000,000,000 people to be exact). A doubly linked list would only require that each individual remembers 2 people (before as well as after) which is quite managable. The number of people required obviously goes down with the more information an individual is able to remember.
The ResNet fee is primarily a connection fee and not a usage fee. If your service is permanently terminated, there will be no subsequent refund of the ResNet activation fee, regardless of when the violation occurred.
.I'm betting they charge ~$150 or so a semester. . .I'd love to testify to the amount of work that would go into "connecting" a comptuer to the network. . .adding a MAC addy to a whitelist is worth $150 these days? Damn I could make a fortune doing that. . .I think that sentence there offended me more than the insane zero-tolerance policy.
Uh. .
Well I googled (you know. . to uh. . verify the integrity of the summary) but came across something also quite bizarre . . .2 people died after crawling into a large helium filled balloon in a rich suburban neighborhood. . .sometimes google surprises me with what it thinks is relevant to my query.
Because those things experienced a crap ton of G's when they hit. . erm, bounced off the ground, not to mention the rotational forces as the thing spins around before coming to a rest. Electronics and metal handle G's a bit better than us humans.
So. . a parachute then?
On a serious note, why not use a parachute? They've been used before on many missions to mars to slow the vehicle down before the retrorockets fired. I mean I understand the hypercone would work too, but I dont understand why a larger and/or more parachutes wouldn't. Then again I'm no fluidynamicist (is that a word because it sounds really really cool).
Yeah I was going to include that in my post but didn't seem relevant as I see improving signal to noise (directional atennas, shutting off other equipment nearby) as "cheating". For example, assume my cellphone has the best electronics available, how can I increase the signal to noise ratio? Standing at the focal point of a dish aimed at the nearest tower? I just sort of assumed the S/N ratio is going to be essentially constant, or probably worse in the future. You could increase the number of symbols (OFDM vs FSK) but if the signal to noise ratio is essentially constant (which was my assumption) then you really can't, you can only increase the number of symbols (increase frequency).
Nonetheless your point is quite valid, my post was merely incomplete.
Holy crap. .
Even with multiplexing there is still a very real limit to the throughput of a certain frequency. I suppose my point is that there are clever ways to allocate bandwidth to users depending on how much they need, or to combine a bunch of frequencies to get the throughput you need, but it just isn't realistic to think that one day everything can be wireless and sending movies to and from each other no problem. Basically with wires you can do intelligent switching, but wireless requires you to broadcast and take up the whole frequency. Also wires have a much higher ceiling. The more stuff we try to make wireless the more problems there are giong to be. Also if you RTFA you see that this thing basically requires line of sight anyways. . .I love my wireless keyboard and laptop with WIFI and my cell phone, but I don't think its necessary to make everything wireless, lets leave the airways to the things that really need it.
:-D
Disclaimer: I am a ham radio operator
There are 2 ways to increase the amount of data that can be sent. Increase the carrier frequency or increase the bandwidth. What these people have done is increase the carrier frequency. Wireless today runs on 2.4ghz, these devices run up to 60ghz. What does that mean? Well it'll take more energy, higher frequency means higher energy, also it attenuates more, meaning shorter range. Not only that, but it can will be more readily absorbed by things like bricks, desks, your foot, etc.
The alternative to this is to increase bandwidth, say use 2.1ghz through 2.6ghz for 1 signal. The obviously downsides to this are you can't run many concurrent streams.
All in all wireless data transfer has a very real ceiling on the amount of data that can be transferred, lower frequency means longer range and ability to go through obstacles, at the cost of reduced data-carrying capacity. I guess the point of this post is to point out that there is only so far we can go with wireless data transfer. I don't think it will be able to keep up (over the long run) with the increasing size of traffic to be a viable alternative to cables when it comes to things like comptuer networking. Anyone have any thoughts on this?
I believe my sister post said it well. You do have to take the time-scale of the isolated species and the also the mobility of the species. Humans have migrated quite a bit in a relatively short time(geologically) , thanks in part to our innate ability to adapt to all sorts of environments w/o having to rely on genetic mutations to give us the necessary edge from our ancestors to survive. Some species of different animals are genetically specialized to their environment, to the point where they can't interbreed and cannot live well in the other species habitat. Humans don't need that genetic specialization to thrive. Though minor genetic mutations (skin color vs. proximity to equator and sun exposure) do help it isn't strictly necessary. For example, I am a Caucasian, if my genetics were thrown into the Sahara many thousands of years ago do you think I would perish? I may not tolerate the sun/heat as well but I could adapt with wearing more clothing instead of relying on genetic mutations. This is even more relevant considering I would most likely be a member of a small community which I could lean upon or find some niche to fill that I was better suited for.
Especially nowadays with gene therapy and all sorts of medications, sunblock, etc. Genetic mutations are (in my extremely unqualified opinion) not very prevalent for the human species. I certainly wouldn't be surprised if we haven't changed much at all genetically from our earliest ancestors. Besides, how long have cro-magnons (the current human species, I'm not sure on the terminology) existed? Considering the average lifespan has it really been enough generations to have a large enough mutation to create a separate species?
In Soviet Russia, RIAA pays you!!! hmm. . .actually that doesn't quite work. . .Yeah you're right, this one is hard.
.atleast that one is the inverse of what happened here, good enough for government work I'd say.
In Soviet Russia, RIAA countersues you!! Eh. .
What about OpenMoko? An open source and open hardware cell phone slated for consumer release around October 2007. If Intel wanted to do something seems getting involved there would be a great place to start. Had they have gotten involved a bit sooner they could have probably convinced the developers to use intel hardware instead of what they are currently using (I believe it is samsung . . don't quote me on that though).
Well, my sound card has something called "What U Hear" which basically loops the output back into the input. . .internally. I think it is entirely possible (I don't know this for sure, it is just a logical assumption) that it doesn't even convert it to analog but instead takes the wave stream (series of floating point values at 44.1khz, dont know the technical name) from the OS/driver, and just puts that back into input without using the ADD converter. In this sense it is entirely digital, it skips the analog parts of both input and output; no analog conversion at all. There is no way DRM can stop that (short of maliciously crippling the driver) as it's about as low-level as you can get.
.what a joke.
Now that I think about it, im not too sure what a DRM would do. Stop people from saving the actual stream and playing it back later through their player? Stopping people from taking the data before it goes to the soundcard and saving it? I'm sure you could find a software sound card emulator that does just that, takes whatever any program gives to it for it to output and instead saves to disk or something. I think the only way to stop people from recording it would be to introduce jingles and such into the music itself. .
What "nationalistic chest-thumping"? Actually I think it makes a lot of sense. If I was going to make some hardware, would I want it to use the EU system, the US system, or both? By using both you gain redundancy, reliability, and even accuracy.
:-/
If the EU made the first positioning system and the US made the 2nd, I'd still say making systems that only used the US's would be a bad idea. GPS-only systems will probably phase out slower due to compatibility issues. A lot of hardware out there was designed for GPS in mind and not Galileo. Anything that is designed for Galileo might as well toss in support for GPS since it already exists. I think you're just taking it the wrong way
I believe what he meant was that a thread that goes wonky and eats up as much CPU as it can is much less noticeable on a multi-core system. If you have 1 program in a state like that on a 1 core machine, your machine is essentially unusable. If you have 3 threads lock up on a 4 core system you might not notice at all. . .
Oh eating hamsters is no big deal. . it's eating live ones that is terrifying. . have you ever seen Mr.Lemiwinks? I don't know about you but the idea of a hamster going on a quest through my insides is definitely terrifying. . .
Probably because 90% of applications are only designed for 1 continuous input device (a mouse).
Pretty much everything in there is designed to make it impossible to figure out what it's doing. Also it does nothing useful.
You misread the article, it clearly states "- 122 orders of magnitude larger". So while the magnitude of the energy density is "ridiculously high" it is the sign that is truly interesting. Negative energy has some bizarre properties.
Ah yeah, I omitted a few keywords like "for". My goal was to make it as confusing as possible by using bizarre keywords like strictfp, transient, syncrhonnized, instanceof, etc. Keywords that aren't used that much. Also I wanted it to not look like java, so anything that isn't typically used much in java code went in. Notice the assert and ? operator. I used ? instead of if-else for a reason. Also gotta love the "break again" statement, didn't know you could break to label. Do-while loop with the while at the end, etc. Not to mention that the class always throws itself as an exception. . for some reason I find that freaking hilarious. Maybe someday I'll rewrite it to truly include them all. I can confidently say that in its current form it servers its purpose.
Here is a little teaser though
Well, I think in situations like that you should go with a "best guess". Say they have a galaxy, 60% say elliptical and 20% say counter clockwise and 20% say clockwise. Wouldn't that be more valuable than 100% I dont know?
.I'm going to talk to a friend of mine who is an astrophysics major and see if she can give any helpful strategies.
BTW: One good way my high school astronomy teacher taught us to differentiate was ellipticals are usually like a light-source surrounded by fog or just plain fog, whereas spirals have more definite bounds. I also think they tended to be certain colors as well (spiral=blue elliptical=orange) but I'm not certain on that. .