A little digging reveals some of the facts about this. IMHO, a priority inversion problem could have happened with any RTOS, but should have been picked up during testing.
In the early days of Linux (1992/1993ish) a new filesystem seemed to appear each week. Most were pretty unstable, though. My first Linux machine, which started out as v0.11, kept its root partition as minix-fs for a long time for this reason (and also because I didn't feel like recreating my system).
If fabber scientists are really clever, they'll design the components so that they can be easily disassembled as well, so that components can be endlessly recycled.
This is already done. Often times with prototypes, the most expensive parts are removed and put on the next rev of the prototype.
Wow? There are bunch of contract manufacturers that do rapid turnaround. Browse through and of the trade rags, and you will find some. I also don't see the point of the ``special'' software. File formats for netlists and layout are standard, and just about all of the CAD tools can generate files in just about all of the formats.
This is really entertaining. linux switched to ELF in 1993? 1994? Despite my UID, I started using linux pretty much since its inception (still have my 0.11 boot and root disks on 5.25" floppy) and experienced the whole object format ``transition'' (fiasco?)
My recollection of the message traffic on the mailing lists was that the object format change was to be based on published standards and support in gcc, and the shared library mechanism was supposed to improve on some of the limitations in the SunOS 4.1.x implementation.
I seriously doubt that standard equipment will make it into the UCI rules. Mainly, there are too many variables for proper bike fit. Something minor, like pedal style, can make a big positive or negative impact on a rider. Other things, like leg to torso to arm proportions, make geometry standardization totally unfair.
I used to race (badly). The fact that numbers are a source of drag is pretty much common knowledge. I can't remember how the pros attach their numbers in big races, but for most USCF events, they are pinned on, and are pretty much sails on windy days.
Search Monster or the paper for ``firmware'' or ``embedded''. Most places won't even call you back unless you know either ARM or PowerPC asm (depending on what kind of shop they are). You may not work in asm most of the time, but you really have to know it to be an effective embedded programmer.
But things like this make me think that patents should be treated like trademarks, and if there is sufficient prior cases in which you did not defend your patent when you rightly should have, you lose the rights to the exclusivity that the patent would have otherwise offered.
I think that in may cases, trademarks are a very public thing, and infingements are likely to be noticed. On the other hand, a patent used as a non-promoted building block for a product is likely to go unnoticed, despite how many infringements there are.
Many tradesmen also do not want others using their tools for fear of damage, theft, loss, adjustments, etc. I know I get mad if my wife uses any of my tools and doesn't clean them or put them back in their proper place.
The article didn't mention the frequency being used, but wouldn't a simple RF choke (or wall of chokes) prevent this from being used (kinda like the shielding used in a microwave oven)?
The articles were a bit lacking details, but a few things struck me.
It didn't say what they were routing between. In most instances, merchant satellites are just used for point to point connections, so they are just bent-pipes. I am assuming that they are routing between different spot-beams or transponders. Or maybe the router is actually a bridge?
One of the articles said that the satellite in question was a LEO. This means that it is in a non-stationary orbit, so ground terminals will have periodic outages, and also need to track the satellite. This complicates persistent connections.
There is always some sort of hyped technology or process in business. I witnessed several when I worked for a mega-corp. At various times, C++, CASE, ``The Web'', Java, SEI, ISO, ``paperless'', TQM, etc, were going to solve all of their problems.
I don't get it either. The article didn't mention anything about why the customer wanted to keep the IP block. My only guess is that he/she/it configured something and used IP addresses instead of names, and he/she/it doesn't have access to a box to reconfigure it. However, NAT should be able to solve that problem, since that's kinda one of the things it was designed to do.
This only works if you have decent reception in your home. I live in an old stone house with bad coverage to begin with. I have to go outside every time I get a call on my mobile phone.
(S(SKK)(SKK))(S(SKK)(SKK)) is the result of applying the abstraction algorithm to the lamba term (\x.x x)(\x.x x). It is pretty easy to show that (\x.x x)(\x.x x) -> (\x.x x)(\x.x x) where -> is beta reduction, so an infinite number of reductions are possible.
Slashdot Mirror
A little digging reveals some of the facts about this. IMHO, a priority inversion problem could have happened with any RTOS, but should have been picked up during testing.
In the early days of Linux (1992/1993ish) a new filesystem seemed to appear each week. Most were pretty unstable, though. My first Linux machine, which started out as v0.11, kept its root partition as minix-fs for a long time for this reason (and also because I didn't feel like recreating my system).
IIRC, Wind River had a picture on their homepage of one of the previous Mars projects with a blurb saying that it ran VxWorks
If fabber scientists are really clever, they'll design the components so that they can be easily disassembled as well, so that components can be endlessly recycled.
This is already done. Often times with prototypes, the most expensive parts are removed and put on the next rev of the prototype.
Wow? There are bunch of contract manufacturers that do rapid turnaround. Browse through and of the trade rags, and you will find some. I also don't see the point of the ``special'' software. File formats for netlists and layout are standard, and just about all of the CAD tools can generate files in just about all of the formats.
Oops. I should clarify this a bit. The SWF standard is available from Macromedia. I think this is the proper link. The FLA file format is proprietary.
The standard isn't open like SVG, but you can download it from Macromedia.
This is really entertaining. linux switched to ELF in 1993? 1994? Despite my UID, I started using linux pretty much since its inception (still have my 0.11 boot and root disks on 5.25" floppy) and experienced the whole object format ``transition'' (fiasco?)
My recollection of the message traffic on the mailing lists was that the object format change was to be based on published standards and support in gcc, and the shared library mechanism was supposed to improve on some of the limitations in the SunOS 4.1.x implementation.
I'm sorry, Fry, but astronomers renamed Uranus in 2620 to end that stupid joke once and for all ...
Mainly because the unix philosophy is ``do one thing only, and do it well''. I think that most people would have ls not paginate than to do it poorly.
I seriously doubt that standard equipment will make it into the UCI rules. Mainly, there are too many variables for proper bike fit. Something minor, like pedal style, can make a big positive or negative impact on a rider. Other things, like leg to torso to arm proportions, make geometry standardization totally unfair.
I used to race (badly). The fact that numbers are a source of drag is pretty much common knowledge. I can't remember how the pros attach their numbers in big races, but for most USCF events, they are pinned on, and are pretty much sails on windy days.
Search Monster or the paper for ``firmware'' or ``embedded''. Most places won't even call you back unless you know either ARM or PowerPC asm (depending on what kind of shop they are). You may not work in asm most of the time, but you really have to know it to be an effective embedded programmer.
But things like this make me think that patents should be treated like trademarks, and if there is sufficient prior cases in which you did not defend your patent when you rightly should have, you lose the rights to the exclusivity that the patent would have otherwise offered.
I think that in may cases, trademarks are a very public thing, and infingements are likely to be noticed. On the other hand, a patent used as a non-promoted building block for a product is likely to go unnoticed, despite how many infringements there are.
Many tradesmen also do not want others using their tools for fear of damage, theft, loss, adjustments, etc. I know I get mad if my wife uses any of my tools and doesn't clean them or put them back in their proper place.
The article didn't mention the frequency being used, but wouldn't a simple RF choke (or wall of chokes) prevent this from being used (kinda like the shielding used in a microwave oven)?
The articles were a bit lacking details, but a few things struck me.
It didn't say what they were routing between. In most instances, merchant satellites are just used for point to point connections, so they are just bent-pipes. I am assuming that they are routing between different spot-beams or transponders. Or maybe the router is actually a bridge?
One of the articles said that the satellite in question was a LEO. This means that it is in a non-stationary orbit, so ground terminals will have periodic outages, and also need to track the satellite. This complicates persistent connections.
The biggest problem with Appletalk were the stupid cables which used a DIN type connector, which would never stay connected.
You forgot to initialize Q to a null list...
There is always some sort of hyped technology or process in business. I witnessed several when I worked for a mega-corp. At various times, C++, CASE, ``The Web'', Java, SEI, ISO, ``paperless'', TQM, etc, were going to solve all of their problems.
I don't get it either. The article didn't mention anything about why the customer wanted to keep the IP block. My only guess is that he/she/it configured something and used IP addresses instead of names, and he/she/it doesn't have access to a box to reconfigure it. However, NAT should be able to solve that problem, since that's kinda one of the things it was designed to do.
I keep telling them, "find out who they are so you can report them," but they always forget.
I don't get many calls anymore, but I keep a few printouts handy of my states complaint form handy so I can fill them out while I am on the call.
This only works if you have decent reception in your home. I live in an old stone house with bad coverage to begin with. I have to go outside every time I get a call on my mobile phone.
Kinda.
(S(SKK)(SKK))(S(SKK)(SKK)) is the result of applying the abstraction algorithm to the lamba term (\x.x x)(\x.x x). It is pretty easy to show that (\x.x x)(\x.x x) -> (\x.x x)(\x.x x) where -> is beta reduction, so an infinite number of reductions are possible.
If I worked it out right, it is an infinite loop expressed in terms of the S and K combinators (it evaluates to itself).